Live data from Hacker News

Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

github.com

121–130 of 381 posts

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#121

Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing a thing to Free/Open License! Unfortunately, I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in password manager in Firefox is too good. But for anyone with more advance needs (or who doesn't trust a password manager built into a web browser, I always recommend Bitwarden because KeepassXC + syncing is way too difficult for normal people.

Does it support sharing passwords with family members?

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#122

Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing a thing to Free/Open License! Unfortunately, I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in password manager in Firefox is too good. But for anyone with more advance needs (or who doesn't trust a password manager built into a web browser, I always recommend Bitwarden because KeepassXC + syncing is way too difficult for normal people.

I'm glad that Bitwarden moved quickly to resolve this. At least for me, Firefox's password manager isn't really a replacement. Bitwarden is approved by my employer, self-hostable, and supports logins for the litany of apps across my browsers and mobile devices. Whether it's the mobile app, mobile website, or site in my browser, Bitwarden just works for the most part. It's also quite nice that Bitwarden can store arbitrary information like CCs, secure notes, and how I capitalized the answers to security questions and other account recovery/login information.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#123
post #64

What would be a good way to backup the passwords stored in Bitwarden? I am worried that someday suddenly bitwarden could stop working and I will lose access to all the stored passwords? Should I have a physical copy of all the passwords stored in a vault at home?

If you have some sort of home server, I'd recommend hosting vaultwarden (an open-source implementation of the BitWarden server). It works fine with the official apps. Their enterprise model requires a standard API, so it's not going to break anytime soon.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#124
post #105
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Password management is like exercise. Even when people say they understand the value and want to do it, they don't. Even if you implement it for them, if it's not something that slots perfectly into their existing routine, they're not going to do it. Thankfully passkeys are here.

It's fine, even bad password management is better than passkeys. Thankfully the incredible hype for passkeys has been dead for years now and people are starting to question it.

Is this... is this sarcasm? I honestly can't tell anymore.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarity to past experiences of start of the declines of service/apps.

What app got worse after going open source that you're thinking of?

> after going open source

I wasn't thinking that at all. BW started as open source afaik.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#126
post #124
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fine, even bad password management is better than passkeys. Thankfully the incredible hype for passkeys has been dead for years now and people are starting to question it.

Is this... is this sarcasm? I honestly can't tell anymore.

It is not.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#127
post #95

Can somebody ELI5?

AFAIK they went closed source the other day which triggered backlash and now they're opening back up.

My understanding is they were never closed source. Some of their code is GPL and some is proprietary, but all is source-available on GitHub. There was a bug where you couldn't build their client without a proprietary dependency, but they have fixed that so you can now build their client with only GPL code again.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#128

Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing a thing to Free/Open License! Unfortunately, I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in password manager in Firefox is too good. But for anyone with more advance needs (or who doesn't trust a password manager built into a web browser, I always recommend Bitwarden because KeepassXC + syncing is way too difficult for normal people.

I'm glad that Bitwarden moved quickly to resolve this. At least for me, Firefox's password manager isn't really a replacement. Bitwarden is approved by my employer, self-hostable, and supports logins for the litany of apps across my browsers and mobile devices. Whether it's the mobile app, mobile website, or site in my browser, Bitwarden just works for the most part. It's also quite nice that Bitwarden can store arbi…

> It's also quite nice that Bitwarden can store arbitrary information like CCs, secure notes, and how I capitalized the answers to security questions and other account recovery/login information.

+1. I use my password manager (currently 1Password, but I have been looking at self-hosting Bitwarden/Vaultwarden) more for storing credit card information and security questions.

Most built-in password managers don't cut it on that front.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#129

Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing a thing to Free/Open License! Unfortunately, I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in password manager in Firefox is too good. But for anyone with more advance needs (or who doesn't trust a password manager built into a web browser, I always recommend Bitwarden because KeepassXC + syncing is way too difficult for normal people.

Does it support sharing passwords with family members?

This (along with syncing on iOS) is what made me switch from `pass` to Bitwarden. Password sharing (and self-hosting sync with vaultwarden) are killer features for me.

Re: Bitwarden SDK relicensed from proprietary to GPLv3

#130
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can it store TOTPs and passkeys as well? These are two things encountered even by "regular people" more and more. Especially keeping passkeys platform-independent is a huge advantage, in my view.

There will always be different opinions, but my opinion is that storing your TOTPs in your password manager is at best a reduction in security because you're reducing your 2 factors down to 1 factor. If the password manager gets compromised (even phished! It needn't involve the password manager's servers getting hacked), then you gain nothing by having 2FA enabled. I would strongly advise using something like Aegis o…

This depends on the threat model. Having 2FA in the PW manager defends against someone phishing the password and database leaks on the server side, which are the most common in my threat model. But note that if they can phish your pw, they can probably phish your 2FA as well.

It does obviously not protect against the scenario where someone is breaking into your password vault.

I tend to enable 2FA but conveniently save the token in the PW manager for relatively low equity stuff, just to make it less enticing for an attacker, but use hardware FIDO for everything actually important.

Post reply on HN