Thomas Pornin didn't have great things to say about ssss: https://security.stackexchange.com/a/83924
Not sure if those points are still relevant
Not sure if those points are still relevant
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Shamir_Secret_Snakeoil
Probably the best fast way to get an intuition for this is to realize that Shamir Secret Sharing is literally a generalization of the One Time Pad to support N of M threshold security and so it shares in common much of the same "theoretically perfect", "insecure in practice", and "highly appealing to people who don't know better" properties.
Of course, there are places to use it-- especially embedded inside other systems-- but unfortunately most of the interest comes from places where it doesn't make sense and this reality is reflected in the software.
but sometimes you just have to write down passwords. you can use a password manager, but then you need to guard the master password. you can use a TPM with a PIN, but what if you lose the PIN or get hit by a bus or the TPM gets fried?
so either you write down the whole password in at least one place, or you write down shards. shards seem safer.
The added threshold part is often not easy to justify vs, something like having two factors (data and key) and backups of each.
It's also the case that my link is specific to Bitcoin where there are really good alternatives.
All the fault information there is in software people would have gone and downloaded instead of "rolling their own".
It's not like cryptography software is magical gift from the gods, someone wrote it.
And often the people writing SSS software do not do a good job, partially because the properties that SSS by itself provides are not very useful and if they were thinking carefully they wouldn't write it at all.