Desktop version 2024.10.0 is no longer free software · Issue #11611 · bitwarden/clients
github.com
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: Y...

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.

    • midnightblue@lemmy.caEnglish
      3·
      1 hour 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

    • Bilb!AEnglish
      8·
      7 hours ago

      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
        2·
        7 hours ago

        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!AEnglish
          4·
          6 hours ago

          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
            2·
            6 hours ago

            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!AEnglish
              2·
              6 hours ago

              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?