In my opinion, pass doesn’t have an equivalent usage than Bitwarden or KeepassXC. These are GUI application with a lots of fields and features like pwd expiry, notes, etc. Additionally Bitwarden has 2FA login, is cloud based so you can use it on multiple devices. The pass utility cannot and will never compete with those features.

However pass has a trick that none of the GUI apps can compete. You can use it in scripting. For example, you can inject a secret in your script like this:

MYPWD=$(pass show MyProject/mySoSoPwd)

Then you can reference to your pwd with $MYPWD. You can share your script, publish on open-source etc. And never worry about leaking your credentials. Pass can also generate OTP password and save pwd on git conveniently which KeepassXC cannot do. Bitwarden needs paid account to have OTP. And even if you have paid Bitwarden, pass is still faster, b/c it’s just a quicker to type a convenient alias on the cmd line than open Bitwarden and click around. And I am saying that even thought I am a very bad typist.

In case you are not yet convinced about pass. My colleagues who don’t want to go through the overhead of learning pass + GPG. They use various low tech tricks to get their pwd when they need (our company forbid to hardcode creds). Often time consuming GUI app (b/c manual) and sometimes even unsafe methods. If you don’t write scripts or don’t need to enter often pwd during your work day. Then pass is not useful.

export PASSWORD_STORE_CLIP_TIME=120
export PASSWORD_STORE_DIR=”$HOME/Documents/MyPasswordStore”

Using pass improve significantly the safety of my scripts. The script safely acquires the secret using MYSECRET=$(pass show MyGroup/MyKey1).

Not sure why you have long command name like `password-store-copy`. I use `pass -c` or `pass –clip`.

It would take a lot to entice me to set up a one computer only system, but it is something I am always willing to entertain, if you can show me why it’s better than the software I am currently using.