1000
Bitwarden's new CEO has a Private Equity background, removed 'Inclusion' and 'Always Free' from their website -- because of course he did (www.fastcompany.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
229 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In the latest episode of "they will always sell you out" - they sold you out! Who would've thought.

Hoping for a good alternative client to appear, the writing is on the wall. Vaultwarden can't exist without "leeching" off of Bitwarden.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

except when the wide populace starts accepting it being device locked, and your opinion does not matter anymore to those making the decisions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (1 child)

    No one of the people I know that use passkeys use it from the phone, either they use a password manager, they have passwords on a physical note, on an excel file in the desktop, a physical yubikey, or bitwarden like me. That's everyone I physically know including every family member, friends and work people.

    I know it's anecdotal, but you present your "wide populace" fact without giving sources too, and since I know no one that uses phone based passkeys, even if my experience is anecdotal, I say sus. Check your bias.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    but you present your "wide populace" fact without giving sources too

    my statement is not that many people are using passkeys today. but that if there comes a time when many people will use passkeys, they will be as careless and convenient as they are with everything else today, accepting any restrictions, because "why would anyone not use Google Passkeys? It's the most convenient thing!".

    and not only that. I was talking about device locking but that's only part of the problem. isn't it that passkey receiving services can identify the client software, and decide they will only accept passkeys from x and y clients?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent