• cmrn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    7 hours ago

    How many times do I need to pack up and move to the next “best option”

  • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Oh, for fuck’s sake. Can we have a decent password manager that isn’t tied to a browser or company? I pay for Bitwarden. I’m not being cheap. But open source is more secure. We can look at the code ourselves if there’s a concern.

    • asap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      59 minutes ago

      Nothing in the article or in the Bitwarden repo suggests that it’s moving away from open source

      • pmc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Isn’t Vaultwarden used with non-free Bitwarden clients?

        • Bilb!@lem.monster
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour 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.

  • unskilled5117@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    This is an important issue IMO that needs to be addressed and the official response by Bitwardens CTO fails to do so.

    There is not even a reason provided why such a proprietary license is deemed necessary for the SDK. Furthermore this wasn’t proactively communicated but noticed by users. The locking of the Github Issue indicates that discussion isn’t desired and further communication is not to be expected.

    It is a step in the wrong direction after having accepted Venture Capital funding, which already put Bitwardens opensource future in doubt for many users.

    This is another step in the wrong direction for a company that proudly uses the opensource slogan.

    • irotsoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      They’re basically trying to get rid of vaultwarden and other open source forks. I expect they’ll get a cease and desist and be removed from github at some point in the not too distant future if they don’t make some changes. I have a vaultwarden instance and use the bit warden clients. Guess I’ll need to look for alternatives in case Bitwarden decides to get aggressive.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Goddammit. It’s getting to the point I’m going to have to figure out how to write my own app for this.

    • Humanius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      It shouldn’t even be that complex…

      I might be mistaken, but ultimately a password manager is basically nothing more than a database of passwords in an encrypted zip file, right? That could entirely be self-hosted with off the shelf open source applications stringed together.
      All you’d need is a nice UI stringing it all together.

      Edit: I’m not sure why people are downvoting me. Is that not what a password manager essentially is?

      • LedgeDrop@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It’s the “stringing it all together” that could be problematic.

        If you have multiple clients (desktop/cellphone) modifying the same entry (or even different entries in the same “database” ). You need something smart enough to gracefully handle this or atleast tell you about it.

        I did the whole “syncing” KeePass and it was functional, but it also meant I needed to handle conflicts - which was annoying. I switched and really appreciate the whole “it just works” with self-hosted bitwarden.

      • HereIAm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I see it as it’s easy to self host. But I’m not skilled nor rich enough to guarantee the availability of it. I don’t want to be stuck on a holiday without my passwords because my server back home died from black out or what have you.

        I pay for bitwarden and the proton mail package to keep the password management market a bit more competitive and it actually works out cheaper. It would be nice to have protons anonymous emails built in, but I can live with it.

        But I might have to reconsider if Bitwarden is going a different direction that what I’m paying for.

      • wintermute@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Keepass is exactly that. Basically all the client side parts, and the database is a single encrypted file that you can sync however you want.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I’ve done basically this in the past by encrypting a text file with GPG. But a real password manager will integrate with your browser and helps prevent getting phished by verifying the domain before entering a password. It also syncs across all my devices, which my GPG file only worked well on my desktop.

    • r00ty@kbin.life
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      13 hours 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 hours 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).

        • irotsoma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours 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.

        • r00ty@kbin.life
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours 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.

      • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Don’t forget option 3: someone writes a vaultwarden client independent of the closed-source crap.

        If you can write a server that fully supports the client via the documented API, then you know everything you’d need to do to make a client as well.

        • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          7 hours ago

          That’s not a third option in the same list (things they are going to do), it’s an item in an entirely different list (foss responses to their actions).

  • quissberry@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Well, I guess not having password manager yet did had some benefit because now I know not to use bitwarden

    • oaklandnative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Proton Pass is open source and the company that runs it recently reincorporated as a Swiss non-profit to ensure their privacy mission can’t be bought out by venture capitalists etc.

      https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonPass/comments/153t85q/proton_pass_is_open_source_and_has_now_passed_an/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

      https://proton.me/blog/proton-non-profit-foundation

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        so the “no longer open source” means they’ll be moving to a saas model or something? i’m not super cybersecurity savvy but bitwarden is what i use

        • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          62
          ·
          14 hours ago

          No, technically they already are SaaS company. That’s mostly how they make their money.

          Also it should be noted “no longer open source” doesn’t mean they’ve done a “our code is now closed and all your passwords are ours” rug pull like some other corporations. This is a technical concern with the license and it no longer meets proper FOSS standards (in other words, it has a restriction on it now that you wouldn’t see in, for example, the GPL).

          So by and large the change is very minimal, the code is still available, it’s still the best option. However, this does matter. It may be a sign of the company changing directions. It’s something they should get pushback about.

          • dustyData@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            The SDK was never FOSS, and was never under the GPL. Hence why they can add the text mentioned in the article. You don’t get to change the text of a FOSS license to begin with. It isn’t unheard of for text like this to be part of proprietary software that integrates with and uses FOSS that are under different licenses.

            That said, this is concerning, but whether it changes BW’s FOSS state is a matter of legal bickering that has been going on for decades.

            • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 hours ago

              You can’t retroactively change FOSS licensing, but oft times you can alter the licensing moving forward. Not always the case, of course. But in no way are all FOSS licenses set in stone.

      • ilmagico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        13 hours ago

        +1 For KeePassXC and the KeePass ecosystem. Yes, you need to sync the database yourself, but you can use any file sharing service you like, e.g. google drive, dropbox… or selfhost something like nextcloud (like I do), which for me is actually a point in its favor.

        Based on this news, I think I made the right choice back then when I decided to go with KeePass.

        • kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          As someone who used to use KeePass, went to LastPass, and then Bitwarden (Vaultwarden), I finally got my non-tech literate wife to use Bitwarden. I’m concerned that KeePass might end up being more difficult if it comes down to it. I believe that KeePass had some sort of browser integration but it really has been a long time since I used it so who knows the current state. Curious how browser integration is today.

    • ChillPill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Keepass? No cross device support, you need to manage that yourself through something like Google Drive…

      • ilmagico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        13 hours ago

        What do you mean “no cross device support”? KeePassXC supports Win, Mac, Linux and there are iOS and Android apps available…

        As for the lack of cloud and requirement to provide your own synchronization, for some (like me) that’s a feature, not a limitation :)

        • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Do any of the iOS or Android apps support passkeys? I looked into this a couple days ago and didn’t find any that did. (KeePassXC does.)

          • ilmagico@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            13 hours ago

            I don’t use passkeys so I don’t know. Maybe I should research into passkeys, what’s the benefit over plain old (long, randomly generated) passwords?

            • jqubed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              12 hours ago

              I’m no expert in this but the passkeys really on some sort of public key, cryptographic pair. Your device will only send your encrypted cryptographic secret when it gets the correct encrypted cryptographic secret from the destination. This makes it much harder to steal credentials with a fake website or other service.

            • ilmagico@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              13 hours ago

              Ok, from a quick search, it seems passkeys rely on some trusted entity (your browser, OS, …) to authenticate you, so, yeah, I’m not sure if I like that. The FIDO alliance website is all about how easy, convenient and secure passkeys are, and nothing about how they actually work under the hood, which is another red flag for me.

              I’ll stick to old-fashioned, long, secure, randomly generated passwords, thanks.

              • deejay4am@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Passkeys rely on you holding a private key. The initial design was that a device (like a browser or computer/phone) stored the private key in a TPM-protected manner, but you can also store it in a password manager.

                This is more secure than a password because of the way private/public key encryption works. Your device receives a challenge encrypted with the public key, decrypts with the private key and then responds. The private key is never revealed, so if attackers get the public key they can’t do shit with it.

                Just be sure that your private key is safe (use a strong master password for your PM vault) and your passkey can’t be stolen by hacking of a website.

                • ilmagico@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  I see, that makes sense and should be more secure, in theory. Thanks for the explanation.

                  The issue I have is, whether I need to trust a third party with my private key, e.g. Google with Android, Microsoft with Windows, etc. (yes on linux it’s different, but that’s not my only OS).

                  Also if the private key does get compromised (e.g. local malware steals it), hopefully there’s an easy way to revoke it.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        lol that’s what i used before i switched to bitwarden-- didn’t have any complaints, but the database key file thing was kind of a pain

    • asudox@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The server is not open source and I wouldn’t trust a business that is not just working on password managers.

      • Cris@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Its worth noting I don’t think they’re actually a company anymore, I think they’re now a non-profit (I may be mistaken, but that’s my present understanding)

      • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 hours ago

        and I wouldn’t trust a business that is not just working on password managers.

        Because…? They’re a privacy tool oriented company, no?

        • asudox@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Because they aren’t focused on just one single service. Bitwarden is a single business only focusing on their password manager, whereas proton has a suite of tools. Passwords need to be stored absolutely in a robust and safe way. I don’t trust proton with anything at all, and the proton pass is no exception. The client might be open source, but the backend is not. It’s also not as mature as bitwarden.

          • Broken@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            These are valid points. There are many password managers, most of which it wouldn’t take much to poke holes in, especially if open source is a main criteria.

            What are some that you would consider with Bitwarden now being off the table?

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I like pass and used it for a while, but sharing passwords with it wasn’t nearly as straightforward as it is with bitwarden.

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Unix elitist think the average user is willing to just memorize a gazillion different commands. No, nope. Not ever going to use a command line password manager.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Is typing “pass” into a terminal really that much harder than typing <passwordmanager>.com into a browser?

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Because unless you paid someone else to set up an account for you, you had to get there somehow. And if you’re using the built in password manager from your browser, none of this article is relevant to you anyway.

            • Cris@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              Most people use an extension on web and an app that uses the system autofil functionality on mobile (at least on android, I’ve not used iOS for a long time)

              You don’t have to open anything, or type anything other than a password. On mobile you just use your fingerprint, don’t have to type anything at all.

              If you’re taking about initial setup that’s also gonna be a lot more complicated for an average user than bitwarden.

              A command line tool is not even remotely a comparable user experience. It may work wonderfully for you, and I’m glad it does, but it’s pretty out of touch to suggest that it’d be a good fit for most people

            • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 hours ago

              have you heard about bookmarks? browser addons? smartphones? URL-checked autofill?

              keepass is superior to pass. it even has a CLI.

    • Virkkunen@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      By trying to make things simple, this ends up making it more complicated and convoluted than anything