• MrFunkEdude@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Cool.

    I just started using Bitwarden almost a year now. I don’t know how I lived without it before? It’s nice to know I wont have to switch to something else.

  • net00@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    46
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Why would anyone trust any company with their passwords??

    Just use keepass and not bother with BS

    • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Bitwarden can be fully self hosted, I’m doing it. My Bitwarden server doesn’t (and can’t) talk to them at all as it has no way to access the internet. They know nothing about my deployment except that I signed up for a free license key.

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Because most people need a cloud solution for synchronization across devices. Unless you’re spinning up your own service like Nextcloud or similar for this, relying on a commercial cloud storage service for storing the file is just as dangerous (perhaps more so, as your attack surface is now across two third party services) as relying on someone like Bitwarden or Lastpass.

      • net00@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        7 hours ago

        There’s a big difference. You trust entities like bitwarden/lastpass/etc to properly encrypt the data, protect your master key, and trust their entire architecture behind the scenes.

        When you encrypt the keepass DB that’s all done by you locally with a open source client. No one knows your master key, and you get a simple encrypted file. You can hand that file to hackers if you want, will be useless without the key.

        I put one of the copies of my keepass on onedrive, and syncs perfectly across all devices.

        Companies can enshiffity at a moments notice.

        • Dark ArcA
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          I do not trust bitwarden to encrypt my data anymore than anyone trusts keypass to encrypt my data.

          They’re both open source and they both do the encryption locally; you’re plainly mistaken.

    • mac@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I used to use Keepass and sync thing and would consistently run into conflicts between my desktop and mobile entries. Maybe there’s a better way to do it that I’m missing, but that was very annoying

  • Jeena@piefed.jeena.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    53
    ·
    11 hours ago

    If that wasn’t on purpose than that was a big fuckup. I was sometimes thinking about testing Bitwarden but with this volatile license situation I’m not interested anymore.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      That’s a poor understanding of the situation. Nothing in the licensing changed. The SDK has always been the proprietary business to business secrets management product. The client integrates with and can use that SDK to provide the paid service to businesses. The client and the server side management of password has always been and still is FOSS.

      This was apparently an accidental change in the build code (not the client code, just the building scripts) that required the inclusion of the SDK to build the client when actually it has never and doesn’t really need any of that code. It prevented building the client without accepting the SDK license. Which it shouldn’t.

      This was fixed and some things will be put in place so it doesn’t happen again. Nothing in the licensing scheme changed, at all. This is not a catastrophic enshittification event. A Dev was just being lazy and forgot to check the dependencies on the build chain before their commit.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You can do what you like, but the change is sane, and they’ve now separated their Secrets Manager, which is their proprietary software for businesses, from their primary client, which is GPL.

      IMO, the internet is doing that thing again where they invent villains.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 hours ago

      “I only read the headline and the comments from the threads a week ago, I am truly disappointed in Bitwarden’s stance against FOSS as I’ve misunderstood it.”