Selfhosted

40407 readers

192 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

367

Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source (www.phoronix.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

BitWarden already has lots of clients. There's also VaultWarden for the server if you want.

This is being blown a bit out of proportion though. All they are saying is the official SDK may have some non-free components going forward. So what? It's a private company, they can do what they want. Or the community can just fork it and move forward with a free one if they want, but it's just not going to be in the official BitWarden clients. Hardly news or a big deal.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I can only speak for myself, but I would never trust opaque, proprietary software to manage my credentials, especially in a networked environment. For me, that's a total showstopper.

I've never had need to use Bitwarden or Vaultwarden as I've always been happy with KeePass, but this news would definitely have me choosing an alternative.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

BitWarden already has lots of clients.

Does it? I'd be very much interested to know. I've been looking for other clients before, because I didn't like the sluggishness of the Electron client, but couldn't find any usable clients at all. There are some projects on Github, none of which seemed to be in a usable state. Perhaps I have been missing something.

This is being blown a bit out of proportion though. All they are saying is the official SDK may have some non-free components going forward. So what? It’s a private company, they can do what they want. Or the community can just fork it and move forward with a free one if they want, but it’s just not going to be in the official BitWarden clients. Hardly news or a big deal.

Nobody said that they can't do that (although people rightfully questioned that their changes are indeed comatible with the GPLv3). I very much disagree that this isn't a big deal, though.

[–] MightyCuriosity 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I use Keyguard on my phone. Loving it so far. Mostly focused on Android but also available for all major platforms.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Thanks, I haven't seen that one before, but I'd really prefer an open source application.