Loading...

From traditional vaults to passwordless and self-custody—here's how modern alternatives compare.
Password managers solved one problem: remembering passwords. But they introduced another:
Even leading tools like LastPass, 1Password, and Dashlane rely on storing sensitive data—encrypted, but still present.
If your credentials exist somewhere, they can be targeted.
There are three main approaches replacing traditional password managers:
01 — Traditional
Still the most widely adopted approach
Pros
Cons
02 — Passwordless
Growing fast, backed by big tech
Pros
Cons
03 — Self-Custody
Human anchored trust
Pros
Cons
Most authentication systems focus on how to store credentials more securely.
Self-custody changes the problem entirely:
What if the keys required to access your
data never existed at rest?
The Hidden Risk:
Keys That Persist
Traditional systems—whether password managers or passkeys—rely on keys stored
Somewhere:
Even when encrypted, these keys:
The Shift:
Ephemeral Key Generation
Self-custody introduces a different model:
And then:
→ They disappear
| Approach | Key Model | What is Stored | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Password Managers | Persistent keys | Password Vaults | Can be breached |
| Passkeys | Persistent keys | Private Keys | Can be compromised |
| Self-custody | Ephemeral keys | Metadata (IPFS) | Nothing usable to steal |
Key Insight
Security isn't about where you store keys.
It's about whether they exist at all.
The industry is evolving:
Self-custody sits at the end of that evolution.
It doesn't try to protect stored secrets.
It removes the risk of storage.
You don't need a better vault. You need a different model.