RyanL Bitwarden Employee

Hello everyone!

Starting in the next release, the Bitwarden apps published to the various stores will be the commercially licensed builds. No action is needed, and the apps will work exactly as they do today.

Bitwarden remains committed to open source security and transparency
The GPLv3 OSS licensed version continues to be updated and published on GitHub
All current features are available in both versions
License details are on GitHub
Bitwarden remains committed to a robust, free forever plan for everyone

If you have any questions, please ask them in this thread. Thanks all!

EDIT:

Bitwarden is not going closed-source
You can still fork Bitwarden
No change to self-hosting, the licensing change affects those who are repackaging and reselling Bitwarden
The free plan is here to stay permanently

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 4 points 6 hours ago

Fine to me as long as this doesnt impact Vaultwarden

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    Having only ever used keepass, what was the advantage of bitwarden? That you didn't need to sync it yourself?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

    There is no way I'm self hosting something this important... So now I'm not sure what to do actually.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 hours ago

    That's why I'm just using KeePass. It's just an encrypted file that you can store on whatever storage you want and sync with existing solutions like Syncthing etc.

    Yes it's a bit finicky when you edit the file on multiple devices before they've synced but it works very well for me..

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 hours ago*

    If self hosting is not an option. Ideas that come to mind:

    Evaluate what it is worth to you and maybe pay for it, if they offer enough worth to you and it is affordable.

    Then there are people who host it and provide it to others. Together with other apps, as a suite. Maybe that's an option. But I suppose, donating or paying is expected here, too.

    Or switch to another solution. Preferably one with an import feature.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 hours ago (1 child)

    All these people keep saying that Vaultwarden won't work because it relies on bitwarden's API but if there is an incompatibility then wouldn't vaultwarden just be left in a functional limbo? Like it'll still work because self hosted but no more new features in parity with official client? Or have I misunderstood the connection between the two

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago*

    this year there were 2 separate updates to bitwarden clients that fucked up vaultwarden servers, because the bitwarden developers "accidentally" reused a variable name in the data that was unused for a few years. but vaultwarden forgot to remove it, and now it is used in a different way, and the clients bugged away so hard that you had to uninstall them, because even if you was fortunate to be able to get to your passwords list you could not get it to sync otherwise

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 133 points 1 day ago (22 children)

    Well, we all know how this ends...

    It's a really sad day for me, I love Bitwarden, it's easily the best password manager I've used, and I'm in IT, I've used a bunch.

    Fuck private equity, fuck it to death. But until then, I'll be moving my test setup for KeyPassXC into production over the coming weeks and months.

    I was happily subscribed to Bitwarden for years for my personal account, I moved several people and a whole company onto it's platform. We had a good run, time to move on.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 23 hours ago (19 children)
  • [–] 31 points 21 hours ago

    If I'm going to have to host my own infrastructure, I don't want it tied to Bitwarden, given the new direction of the company.

    I fully support Vaultwarden though, and I wish them well.

    I'll be going with KeyPassXC and Syncthing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 20 hours ago (8 children)

    Vaultwarden (and all the client apps) depend on Bitwarden for the API spec. If Bitwarden introduces closed features in the API that Vaultwarden can't/won't implement, but the client apps do, it will split the spec. They can also introduce API license keys, which would render Vaultwarden mostly irrelevant.

    The only way for Vaultwarden to remain relevant going forward is to own it and split ways from Bitwarden. This would in turn mean that the FOSS client apps have to decide which to support. But I think the ecosystem is going to fragment eventually anyway, so the sooner every app decides which way they want to go, the better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 17 points 20 hours ago (1 child)
  • [–] 15 points 21 hours ago

    Heh, I'm looking at you to those people that looked at me weird because I told them I was good with Keepass!

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 23 hours ago

    Sure, it's no change for self hosters currently, but it's one more step in moving towards a more closed platform overall. I do hope more FOSS client apps end up getting made sometime soon. I've been using Keyguard on Android for some time, which means the recent several breaking changes in the Bitwarden apps to the Vaultwarden backend haven't hit me as hard, but I do still use the official apps for my laptop and desktop and Keyguard isnt fully FOSS, of course. I'd love to see some forks or brand new apps one of these days that are actually fully FOSS for both mobile and browsers. I've thought about doing some myself, but I have too many other projects and I also don't have a MAC or want to pay the fees to make an iPhone version. And I abandoned my Android Developer account when they started the identity nonsense, so none of my apps are on the official store anymore and Fdroid and similar may not be viable soon, so it would only really be for myself and a few others who use alternate Android OS's.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 1 day ago*

    I guess we're gonna see more open-source apps soon, aimed at Vaultwarden first

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 23 hours ago

    Are they still going to publish the Android client app via their own F-Droid repository?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›