Pull request #10974 introduces the @bitwarden/sdk-internal dependency which is needed to build the desktop client. The dependency contains a licence statement which contains the following clause:

You may not use this SDK to develop applications for use with software other than Bitwarden (including non-compatible implementations of Bitwarden) or to develop another SDK.

This violates freedom 0.

It is not possible to build desktop-v2024.10.0 (or, likely, current master) without removing this dependency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 16 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Does anyone have experience with keyguard? From a cursory glance, this + vaultwarden seems like a good alternative...

[–] bilb@lem.monster 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I have some! I use a self hosted vaultwarden and just two days ago I saw and installed KeyGuard out of curiosity. So far, I can say KeyGuard is a nicer looking and feeling app and... it works. So as long as their intentions are pure, you can use "bitwarden" without using any of their software or infrastructure.

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Just tried it, and it seems you can't edit or add items without a premium subscription??

Or am I missing something?

Edit: Apparently only when installing via the Play Store. Very weird decision.

[–] bilb@lem.monster 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ah, yeah, I installed it from their github with obtainium. I think open source/libre app that charges people to install with the play store is a model a few others have tried as well.

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't think it's unreasonable to want to be paid, but a mandatory subscription when using the most common install method does irk me the wrong way

[–] bilb@lem.monster 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I haven't looked into it at all, but that just seems so strange. Who would pay that when the original Bitwarden app is still there for free? Most people who would even know about KeyGuard would know how to install it from somewhere else. Is it essentially a donation?

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 3 points 1 month ago

It would be if it's a one-time payment, but it's a yearly subscription, and not a cheap one!

[–] midnightblue@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

I just tried it out and I'm amazed. It looks and feels just like 1Password, my absolute favorite password manager (before I switched to Bitwarden, because 1Password is proprietary and pretty expensive)

I definitely recommend it

[–] unrushed233@lemmings.world 1 points 1 month ago

It definitely has a nicer design and blends in well with the rest of the system (at least on Android)

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

License

The source code is available for personal use only.

That doesn't really seem like an improvement, although do they say they're planning on releasing it under the FSL.

[–] smiletolerantly@awful.systems 3 points 1 month ago

Ah damn it -.-

Too bad, the app is really nice to use :/