You have your link formatted backwards. It should be Vaultwarden, with the link in the parentheses.
Comment on Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source
ghostface@lemmy.world 1 week ago
https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden Open source version of bitwarden written in rust.
Where is the foundation to support foss?!?
hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 week ago
ghostface@lemmy.world 1 week ago
This is by no means to a slight towards bitwarden. Solid product and community
r00ty@kbin.life 1 week ago
If they're moving away from open source/more monetisation then they're going to do one of two things.
1: Make the client incompatible (e.g you'll need to get hold of and prevent updating of a current client).
2: DMCA the vaultwarden repo
If they're going all-in on a cash grab, they're not going to make it easy for you to get a free version.
potustheplant@feddit.nl 1 week ago
You can’t “dmca” the fork that was created while it was still open source. They could only prevent it from getting future updates (directly from them).
r00ty@kbin.life 1 week ago
If you mean they shouldn't. I'd agree. But, as has been seen a lot on youtube. "They" can DMCA anything they want, and the only route out is usually to take them to court.
I mean I'd hope if they're going in this direction they will be decent about it. But, it's not the way things seem to be lately.
irotsoma@lemmy.world 1 week ago
DMCA is a tool for suppression of free information. It doesn’t require evidence that you’ve made a good faith effort to consider fair use or other legal complexity as it’s meant to take down the information before that is settled in court, but most commonly used to suppress information from a person or group who can’t afford to fight it in court. Microsoft’s Github has a history of delete first without risking their own necks to stand up for obviously fraudulent takedowns much less ones with unsettled law like APIs/SDKs.