• Sunspear@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thing is, a large percentage of internet-connected users might have two or more devices. The simplicity offered by a cloud (be it hosted or selfhosted) password manager is a huge benefit.

        And unless you’re already running a syncthing-like service for something else, setting it up just for a password manager when other services provide it out of the box, is not worth the hassle usually.

        • quaff@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I use KeePass on like… I dunno 5-6 devices? They all sync together via Syncthing. No server needed. My keepass db is just one of the things synced this way.

          Works pretty well.

          These are the apps I use:

          Desktop (Linux & macOS): KeePassXC Andrdoid: KeePassDX iOS: KeePassium

          The whole ecosystem can be used for free. But like… tip your open source devs yo.

          Syncing happens pretty quickly with Syncthing. So conflicts in the keepass DBs are very rare (maybe once a year if I’m impatient after a change on a different device). But they do happen, I’ll give you that. Some restraint (wait for sync) and checking (this is where sorting by modified helps!!!) what’s the latest change helps.

        • lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I use one for work and the other for personal. They are both great, with slightly different convenience/security tradeoffs imo. Big fan of both, don’t know why it has to be one or the other for an OSS credentials manager

          Edit: part of what you’re paying for with BW is first-class native apps

      • Fmstrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        So is BitWarden if you self-hosted. The price increase is for a hosted service which Keepass does not provide.

        • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          (Edit - I misread as Bitwarden and went off on the wrong tangent. Vaultwarden is not centralized, and it’s FOSS - my bad.)

          The person you’re replying to already gave you one: it’s free.

          Second: its not a prime target for attack like centralized, hosted webservices are. See: LastPass being cracked and people’s login data stolen… Twice.

          Yes, it is cryptographically superior to LastPass, and attempts to design around their flaws - but the threat still exists because its a very tasty target on the open internet for cybercrime.

          My little Keepass DB synched over personal VPN by Syncthing? Much harder to find a vector for attack. But it does require more moving parts and maintenance.

          Each have their pros and cons.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wish they handled it better, but I knew about this a while ago, and the price is more than reasonable.

    A decade without a price hike is extremely generous, especially at how cheap their plan was.

    They are a FOSS company that makes a fantastic product I’ve been happy with for years, I’ll gladly pay less than $2 a month to support them. Their server code is licensed with the AGPL, the strongest copyleft license there is, which gives me a lot of confidence.

    Worse case scenario, they enshitify down the road, we are protected via the open source implementations. We’ve seen this many times in the past, Red Hat > Alma & Rocky Linux, Citrix Xen Server > XCP-ng, Terraform > Open Tofu.

    Pay for your open source software, folks 💖

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Paying for good software should be normalized again. One way or the other you’ll always pay. If you don’t pay with your money, you pay with your data.

    • lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      They put a couple things behind the paywall of US$19.80/y: the ability to securely share files instead of just text, and to host TOTP authentication. As it is I prefer using other services for sharing, and while TOTP auth is nice I’m happy with Aegis.

      Edited to fix Bitwarden’s price obscurity

    • guy@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Would love to selfhost. However, I have no trust in my skills to secure my device in the same manner as a provider, and I do not wish my database to be compromised.

      • XLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Would you be okay with synchronizing only when you’re on your own Wi-Fi network? If that’s the case, you don’t have to try exposing anything to the Internet.

        You can also purchase a server online to install it on, but you’re going to get saddled with some kind of monthly fee there.

  • steel_for_humans@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I migrated from the US servers to the EU servers and while looking through my settings I noticed that my renewal was $19.80 instead of $12 last year. At first I thought that the EU servers are much more expensive and was upset that support didn’t tell me before migration, but it turns out that’s just the new price.

  • alakey@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    While the increase is not a huge deal because the total is still cheaper than alternatives, the thing that irks me is how they did indeed just announce it via a blog post titled “Bitwarden launches enhanced premium plan: Complete online security for everyone”. This reads like there’s going to be free, premium and premium+ at best, and “we are just adding more stuff to the premium” at worst, not implying a price bump, at least to me. I did not get my renewal email yet, so can’t confirm whether or not they don’t even mention the annual price, but rather just the monthly one. Another thing that kind of bothers me is that they list “Vault health alerts” as a new thing, while it’s always been there. While “Phishing blocker” just seems like a feature outside of the scope of a password manager.

    All in all, double the price in exchange for x5 more storage and x2 more hardware keys is fine to me, but I hope they improve their communication and actually properly inform users of upcoming pricing changes.

    • 0485@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I had my renewal email come through today. Here is what is says: Your Bitwarden Premium subscription renews in 15 days. The price is updating to $1.65/month, billed annually. As an existing Bitwarden customer, you will receive a one-time 25% loyalty discount for this year’s renewal. This renewal will now be billed annually at $14.85 + tax.

    • 0485@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s not about the price itself. It’s about the lack of transparency. Not being open with a 100% increase is not a good look.

  • NGC2346@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I kept procrastinating on self hosting it, but now i will do it tonight and migrate to my own instance.

    Problem solved.