Oh come now. Doesn't everyone see the difference between needing "cat" to see all passwords and needing to write a script?

No lock is 100% secure. Even safes and professional security is rated in time alone with an expert. I happen to have such experts as friends, since I work in IT and although I'm a Windows guru, not every friend I have is. Some are Unix admins with more than enough know-how to wonder around poking "oooh, is this your messenger config file? Does keep track of ... ooooh. Nice passwords, dork".

There's not much of a difference between a normal lock and an open door for a thief, it takes one 10 seconds to go through it. However, HAVING a lock is not only effective for 99% of the population, it is also the international sign of "stay the heck away".

And no, an one-liner is not enough security. There has to be something that is not one-liner in the terminal. A modified ROT13 would be just fine, thanks. ROT15? Don't know. But there is no ROT15 implemented in any language, you need to write one and that takes a minute on the N900 kbd.

I have the time to see him typing furiously in the terminal and look over the shoulder. Also, it's not immediately obvious that it's a ROT15 and not ROT16 or similar, making the scanning source harder to write.

I'm not asking for 100% security, or even 20% security. I'm asking you not to leave the door wide open.

The draft is killing me.