Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

bitwarden.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 163 posts

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#31

Post by slenk »

ReverseCold wrote: post #17
albertop wrote: post #15

First paragraph on their page disqualifies it completely. I do not want my passwords on anybody’s servers. Our secure cloud syncing features allow you to access your data from anywhere, on any device! Your vault is conveniently optimized for use on desktop, laptop, tablet, and phone devices.

> I do not want my passwords on anybody’s servers. What about your own server? https://help.bitwarden.com/article/install-on-premise/

I run my own server; it works great and is incredibly easy to set up. I would highly recommend people check this software out.

It's maybe not as feature rich as other password managers, but it is being actively developed and the few times I had questions I got a quick response from Kyle (the creator).

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#32

Post by techsupporter »

ReverseCold wrote: post #17
albertop wrote: post #15

First paragraph on their page disqualifies it completely. I do not want my passwords on anybody’s servers. Our secure cloud syncing features allow you to access your data from anywhere, on any device! Your vault is conveniently optimized for use on desktop, laptop, tablet, and phone devices.

> I do not want my passwords on anybody’s servers. What about your own server? https://help.bitwarden.com/article/install-on-premise/

To me, this disqualifies it:

> Each Bitwarden installation requires a unique installation id and installation key.

If I’m self hosting, I want it to be independent of the code provider. It is bad enough, to me, that I have to pay a subscription fee to self-host “advanced” features like Yubikey auth. That’s the same kind of annoying that my own install still must link to their server that can die at any moment.

Let me buy the software to self-host with all of the features. The “subscription” and “integrated” mindset has no place in “I’m doing it myself” installs.

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#34

Post by jillesvangurp »

Solar19 wrote: post #26

This looks like it could be better than LastPass. Bitwarden is the only password manager that I've seen that officially supports Opera, Vivaldi, and Brave. I wonder what the browser support on Android is like. LastPass seems to work only on Chrome on Android, but I like to use Firefox, Opera, and Samsung's optimized browser.

Firefox mobile can use the extension and the native android app is fully supported by Android's password completion support as well.

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#35

Post by keehun »

philliphaydon wrote: post #29
keehun wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for letting me know! Somehow, it wasn't very obvious to me on both desktop app and OTP feature. I still felt its sluggish performance on launch/search/sync was slowing me down a lot throughout the day.

> I still felt its sluggish performance on launch/search/sync was slowing me down a lot throughout the day. I recently switched (maybe 5 weeks or so, ago, from 1Password to Bitwarden, after finding out about it on HN) I imported ~400 odd logins from 1Password, I honestly don't find it any slower than 1 Password. I did notice that with Discord, both 1Password and Bitwarden now integrate with the new iOS password apis.

Maybe it's just my phone (6) but you may find that once you get 1000+ logins, Bitwarden falls apart pretty quickly. I've heard the same from people with 800+ logins. I remember it used to be very quick when I initially used it with a few plugins.

IIRC from their Github issue threads, Bitwarden is using Xamarin, and performant UI has been a consistent struggle with many login entries.

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#36

Post by lhl »

m_sahaf wrote: post #8

There are also two Bitwarden-compatible API implementations in Rust[0] and Ruby[1]. Their main advantage, IMO, is them doing away with the requirement of Microsoft SQL Server. [0] https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs [1] https://github.com/jcs/bitwarden-ruby

There's also a Go implementation: https://github.com/VictorNine/bitwarden-go/

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#39

Post by lhl »

keehun wrote: post #22

I really, really want to be a big fan of Bitwarden. I even used it for the past year and a half. However, the last time HN talked about Bitwarden 7 months ago, I listed some reasons[0] why Bitwarden still fell massively short of 1Password, and I feel that those three points have not been addressed (which I believe impacts the friction/convenience of using Bitwarden). My three points then were: 1. A stand-alone deskto…

I've been a 1Password user for about 10 years, but I never moved to 1Password 6, as I didn't want to sync my vault to their servers (even if it's E2E encrypted). I've moved from being primarily an OSX user to Linux, and as a result, my experience has progressively gotten worse enough on 1PW (broken FF extension, general jankiness running on Wine) that I'm finally looking switch off, either to KeePassXC or to Bitwarden.

As far as a desktop app, it's electron-based, but there is a cross-platform Bitwarden app that seems to work well enough (responsive, minimizes to tray, etc).

I've yet to import all my passwords into Bitwarden (still comparing the Ruby, Go, and Rust standalone server implementations), so I guess we'll see where the experience is after I fully switch.

Regarding 2FA, while it doesn't totally expose you, if you put your token in your PW manager, you've definitely significantly weakened your security.

Re: Bitwarden – Open Source Password Manager

#40

Post by ericseppanen »

mcfedr wrote: post #37
ericseppanen wrote: post #33

"Each Bitwarden installation requires a unique installation id and installation key." Sorry, it doesn't count as open source if everyone needs your permission to run it.

It's open source, not to hard to remove this requirement

The time investment to prove or disprove this statement is more than I'm willing to give. I'd prefer to spend my time working with projects whose maintainers aren't hostile to my privacy.
Post reply on HN