Technology

59111 readers

3721 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

618

Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source (www.phoronix.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

199 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] [email protected] 129 points 2 weeks ago (25 children)

Oh, for fuck’s sake. Can we have a decent password manager that isn’t tied to a browser or company? I pay for Bitwarden. I’m not being cheap. But open source is more secure. We can look at the code ourselves if there’s a concern.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Nothing in the article or in the Bitwarden repo suggests that it's moving away from open source

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It is a license problem. The license condition of the SDK which is required to build the client app change to limit the usage of it. The new license states that you can only use the Bitwarden SDK for Bitwarden. It is against the Freedoom-0 of the Free Software Foundation. The limitation of English language is that it is hard to differentiate between Free (as in Free bear) and Free (as in Freedoom). Also open source which could mean complaining with FOSS and that source is available. This been unfortunately have been abused before.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

From the article, it's a packaging bug, not a change in direction.

Update: Bitwarden posted to X this evening to reaffirm that it's a "packaging bug" and that "Bitwarden remains committed to the open source licensing model."

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I was referring to this which started it all.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Here is the code in question. Basically, it's a source-available, but not FOSS internal SDK, with the following language:

The password manager SDK is not intended for public use and is not supported by Bitwarden at this stage. It is solely intended to centralize the business logic and to provide a single source of truth for the internal applications. As the SDK evolves into a more stable and feature complete state we will re-evaluate the possibility of publishing stable bindings for the public. The password manager interface is unstable and will change without warning.

So I think the "bug" here is in not linking the original repo in the NPM package, and there's a decent chance that this internal SDK will become FOSS in the future once it stabilizes. That said, it's currently not FOSS, but it's too early IMO to determine whether Bitwarden is moving in a non-FOSS direction, or if they're just trying to keep things simple while they do some heavy refactoring to remove redundancy across apps.

Given their past, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I'll be making sure I have regular backups in case things change.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (22 replies)