Bitwarden introduced a non-free dependency to their clients. The Bitwarden CTO tried to frame this as a bug but his explanation does not really make it any less concerning.
Perhaps it is time for alternative Bitwarden-compatible clients. An open source client that’s not based on Electron would be nice. Or move to something else entirely? Are there any other client-server open source password managers?
4shtonButcher@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
Can’t we ever have software that just keeps working? Password managers are like the new RSS readers.
Back to 1)
brayd@discuss.tchncs.de 1 month ago
Well KeePass
jasep@lemmy.world 1 month ago
The downside to Keepass is it is not self hosted, as in it’s designed to run locally per device. Yes, you can put the database file on a network and have multiple clients from different operating systems access the database, but you will end up with collisions and database issues. Ask me how I know.
Running cross platform Keepass (and it’s various forks) is absolutely doable, but it is not as seemless as BitWarden. I’m running self hosted VaultWarden and I’m hoping to run it for a long time as it’s much easier than Keepass.
narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Bitwarden keeps working just fine.
catloaf@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Sure, you’re welcome to keep using the version you like, or to write or maintain one on your own. Or pay someone for their labor to do it for you.
But if you use something made out of someone’s good will, don’t rely on it for anything critical.
gdog05@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Money isn’t necessarily a factor. I’ve paid for many services that have made business or operating changes to the point of needing to separate and then there’s WinZip on the other side of things.