Encryption Software - Asking for Code Review

[Makertelf]

Select Topic Area

Product Feedback

Body

Hello cybersecurity community,

I built an encryption tool with AI — and I’d love expert eyes on the code.

Over the last months I developed ZetaKey, currently a Chrome extension (desktop app coming next). The core idea: no complex passwords required. Each encryption produces two independent artifacts:

Zeta file = the encrypted ciphertext
JSON file = the private key (recovery key)

Decryption needs both. One alone is useless.

What this design blocks by default

• No server-side attacks → fully decentralized (no accounts, no central storage)
• Brute force is pointless → an attacker would need two files, not one secret
• No phishing surface → no login anywhere
  Under the hood

Encryption: AES-256 via Fernet

Effectively replaces classic KDFs (PBKDF2/Argon2) in this flow because the dual-file requirement defeats password-only brute force

CI runs on GitHub and pytest in PowerShell are all green

Backups & recovery

Users simply keep/copy the two files.

Restoration is explicit: the app clearly distinguishes between Zeta and Key files—low risk of mix-ups.

How this differs from FIDO/Passkeys

I’m familiar with FIDO/Passkeys and “zero-knowledge” managers.

Many are still centralized or tied to platform providers.

If a device/account is compromised, the blast radius can be large.
ZetaKey takes a different route: decentralized, no sign-in, no server, and even a compromised device isn’t enough without the second file.

There’s also a one-click mode (no password) that behaves passkey-simple while staying fully decentralized.

Here is the link to the repository: https://github.com/Makertelf/zetakey-gui

Thank you in advance

[github-actions[bot]]

💬 Your Product Feedback Has Been Submitted 🎉

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us! Your feedback is invaluable as we build a better GitHub experience for all our users.

Here's what you can expect moving forward ⏩

• Your input will be carefully reviewed and cataloged by members of our product teams. 
  • Due to the high volume of submissions, we may not always be able to provide individual responses.
  • Rest assured, your feedback will help chart our course for product improvements.
• Other users may engage with your post, sharing their own perspectives or experiences. 
• GitHub staff may reach out for further clarification or insight. 
  • We may 'Answer' your discussion if there is a current solution, workaround, or roadmap/changelog post related to the feedback.

Where to look to see what's shipping 👀

• Read the Changelog for real-time updates on the latest GitHub features, enhancements, and calls for feedback.
• Explore our Product Roadmap, which details upcoming major releases and initiatives.

What you can do in the meantime 💻

• Upvote and comment on other user feedback Discussions that resonate with you.
• Add more information at any point! Useful details include: use cases, relevant labels, desired outcomes, and any accompanying screenshots.

As a member of the GitHub community, your participation is essential. While we can't promise that every suggestion will be implemented, we want to emphasize that your feedback is instrumental in guiding our decisions and priorities.

Thank you once again for your contribution to making GitHub even better! We're grateful for your ongoing support and collaboration in shaping the future of our platform. ⭐

[samjonny107-lab]

Your approach to decentralizing encryption is interesting, and even a Small Business Marketing Consultant might note how clearly you’ve framed the value of the dual-file system for real-world usability. The structure seems solid, getting deeper cryptographic review should help validate the design further.