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

• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  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.”

  I’m not going to jump ship just yet, though I may get around to updating my backup.

  There are plenty of alternatives, so feel free to shop around. But don’t jump the gun just because of a random Phoronix article with an update that says basically the opposite of what the article claims. Wait some time to see if there are actual changes coming.

  source

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yeah no. This is clearly backpedaling and you should look to get away

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Maybe. Here’s what they say in the readme of the project people are complaining about:

      The password manager SDK is not intended for public use and is not supported by Bitwarden at this stage. It is solely intended to centralize the business logic and to provide a single source of truth for the internal applications. As the SDK evolves into a more stable and feature complete state we will re-evaluate the possibility of publishing stable bindings for the public. The password manager interface is unstable and will change without warning.

      There are two ways to take this:

      • this is temporary as they’re refactoring code to reduce duplication across clients
      • refactoring is an excuse to create fully proprietary clients going forward

      Until I see evidence of the latter, I’ll stick with the project, but I’ll be more consistent about creating backups so I can switch easily if I need to.

      source
• GhiLA@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  KeePassxc with syncthing

  Nextcloud with their password solutions

  A notebook

  source