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.

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.

EDIT: The article has been updated and it was described as a “packaging bug” and not an intended change.

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

Vaultwarden updated link

Open source version of bitwarden written in rust.

Where is the foundation to support foss?!?

600 upvotes and only 10 downvotes on literal fake news. I wish readers were less lazy, it’s very frustrating.

Edit: made my statement a bit less toxic. I was mad.

Great, I've just started to use it last week 🤡

can we start reading the articles and not just the headlines??? it literally says it's a packaging bug

Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

According to Bitwardens post here, this is a "packaging bug" and will be resolved.

Daniel García, owner of the Vaultwarden repo, has recently taken employment for Bitwarden.

The plot thickens.

Keepass vault synced over syncthing.

I keep not regretting it.

Well this ain't good. I don't really feel like switching apps.

I wonder~ I wonder~ I wonder whyyyy...