The Quiet Renovation at Bitwarden - ByteHaven - Where I ramble about bytes
blog.ppb1701.com
Back in March, I wrote about Bitwarden doubling their Premium price — and specifically how they did it. Buried in a feature announcement. Priced in fake...

If you are interested in privacy you are probably interested in password storage … plus I wanted everyone to know about the inevitable future enshitification of this product. Spread the word and replacement recommendations are welcome too.

  • Tinkerer@lemmy.ca
    3·
    2 hours ago

    How will this affect vaultwarden? I’ve been using it for 5 years and absolutely love it. I’m worried that I’ll need to switch to something else though?

    • tomatolung@sopuli.xyz
      1·
      1 hour ago

      The Article says:

      A Note for Vaultwarden Users

      Whether self-hosting stays viable long-term is the real question worth sitting with.

      Right now it works because Bitwarden’s clients are open source and the server API is public. Vaultwarden implements that API, and the official apps can’t tell the difference. That depends on Bitwarden continuing to publish open source clients and not restricting which servers they’ll talk to — neither of which is guaranteed under new management.

      The brake on the worst case: self-hosting is a listed Enterprise feature that generates real revenue. Killing it upsets paying business customers. That matters.

      The catch: what Bitwarden sells to enterprises is their own official server stack, not Vaultwarden. Vaultwarden exists in a space they’ve tolerated but never endorsed. If the calculus shifts, the tolerance ends without any announcement. Just let the API drift until compatibility breaks on its own.

      I don’t think that’s imminent. But I also thought the free tier commitment was ironclad, and “Always free” isn’t on the page anymore.The real safety net is that Bitwarden’s clients are Apache 2.0 licensed. A fork would need a rebrand to stay clear of the trademark — different name, tweaked UI, same engine — but that’s a speed bump, not a wall. The web vault works through any browser regardless of what happens to the apps, so worst case you’d lose autofill temporarily while a fork caught up. Inconvenient, not catastrophic. Vaultwarden itself is already proof the model works.

      Watch the clients. If they go closed, the community will notice fast, and the fork will follow.

  • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
    71·
    7 hours ago

    Is is time block headlines with “quiet”? Its like AI decided that word gets the most clicks and its showing up everywhere.

    • (des)mosthenes@lemmy.world
      2·
      54 minutes ago

      thanks for all the suggestions - i’ve since moved to proton pass, not sure if I want to self host this aspect of my security stack - but will be watching closely

    • Bluewing@lemmy.world
      14·
      7 hours ago

      I’ve been using it for years. But I have been waiting for this day to come. Because it always comes at some point without fail.

    • n1ckn4m3@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      5 hours ago

      It’s a very easy migration from Bitwarden to a self-hosted and OSS Vaultwarden, if you have means to self-host. Appreciably, many don’t want to self-host their own apps and I’m not defending Bitwarden’s enshittification at all. It comes for all tech at some point :(

      • kazerniel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        1 hour ago

        It comes for all tech at some point :(

        Not sure if all tech, but definitely the ones that just want to grow grow grow. A counterexample (so far) is the Obsidian team.

      • Dultas@lemmy.world
        3·
        3 hours ago

        I would say that Vaultwarden might not be the best introduction to self hosting given the critical nature and sensitivity of the data. And if you do maybe block the admin page from external sources.