Comment on Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source

• bilb@lem.monster ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  This need not be the case, though! There’s an open source client on Android called Keyguard. I don’t think the desktop app was at all useful anyway. You can just log into your Vaultwarden through any browser. The desktop app is pointless.

  source

  • 486@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Keyguard isn’t open source. Have a look at their license. It just says “All rights reserved”.

    source
  • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    True, but the firefox extension is nice.

    source
• fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The clients are free.

  source

  • pmc@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    They now require a non-free Bitwarden SDK component. That’s what this whole conversation is about.

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      And the whole conversation is about a bug, not a change in direction…

      Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it’s a “packaging bug” and that “Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model.”

      source
    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Only the desktop client. And the response is that not being able to compile sans SDK is an issue they will resolve.

      I still think this is bad directionally, but we need to see what happens.

      source