Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Appearance settings
Discussion options

Describe the bug

I understand the logic of keeping things simple and truly appreciate that. However it seems like passwords or other tokens should be encrypted when stored to disk or memory.

Ideally maybe a separate user/password/token storage place that is encrypted. Then variables name entered in the actual session. LIke:
Username: {{ERP_ID}}
Password: {{ERP_Password}}
or
Username: {{CRM_ID}}
Password: {{CRM_ID}}

That would be all that is seen in the file on disk and/or seen on the screen on the Auth page.

When run the variables would be dynamically and securely passed the actual user name and password.

This would be better in general and better in a shared GIT environment where the code snippets, notes, HTTP, etc.

The encrypted passwords would be in separate encrypted folder/file might or might not be synced to a GIT repository. ... Optional separate path for the folder/file for the passwords that may not necessary be in the same place as the rest of the user data.

To reproduce

  1. Go to ...
  2. Click on ...
  3. Scroll down to ..
  4. See error

App Version and Architecture

5.3.0

System info

Windows 11

Validations

You must be logged in to vote

Replies: 2 comments

Comment options

Thanks for raising this. This is a valid concern for shared or Git-backed vaults, but I wouldn’t classify it as a bug in the current storage model.

massCode v5 uses a simple local Markdown vault, so HTTP auth values are stored as user content. Real secrets should not be committed or shared through the vault.

I’d treat this as a feature request/discussion for secret variables or environments stored outside the vault.

I'll also update the documentation to make this clearer.

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Comment options

You are correct. It is not really a bug as it is working as designed. However I might suggest even in a single user environment it is not a best practice to store passwords in the clear.

I my ideal world I would love to see it separated out as described.

Hopefully this is something you will consider and will benefit others.

thanks

Alan

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
2 participants
Converted from issue

This discussion was converted from issue #771 on May 05, 2026 00:17.

Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.