Bitwarden and it's fully cross-platform. I like that it auto copies the 2FA pin to clipboard after filling in login - cuts out extra clicks and copy movements.

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Vaultwarden is also a great and simple to self-host backend written in Go that runs in Docker.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Isn't it written in Rust?

[–] boerbiet@feddit.nl 2 points 2 years ago

And very easy to set up and run without docker! For, you know, us folks with a BSD server 🙂

[–] gressen@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Authenticator key (TOTP) storage is available to all accounts. TOTP code generation requires premium or membership to a paid organization (families, teams, or enterprise)."

[–] CrescentMadeJr@beehaw.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It’s $10/y and a steal for that excellent software. I pay it and self host it just to support them.

[+] blkpws@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] Itookmyprozac@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

This!

Keepassxc is cross-platform, free and open-source. It has also options for iOS and Android.

[–] CrescentMadeJr@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Bitwarden is all of those things. Unless you use their web vault, then it’s $10/year. Which keepassxc does not have.

[–] CrescentMadeJr@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I’m aware. So is Bitwarden if you don’t use their web vault, which KeepassXC does not have. Keepass can use a cloud drive to sync multiple devices whereas Bitwarden requires a self hosted instance to sync. Personally I would rather trust my own hosted instance over that of a cloud provider. But that all depends on your threat model and who you’re willing to trust. Having used both I personally prefer self hosted Bitwarden.

[+] blkpws@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] CrescentMadeJr@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I know they exist. I think you’re missing what I’m saying.

Bitwarden is fully free and self hostable. That is how I use it. Bitwarden needs a self hosted webserver. KeePass can use only a cloud provider or self hosted cloud storage and also set up a web vault.

With Bitwarden, if you don’t want that hassle you can use their webvault they host. You cannot do that with keepass. That is what costs the $10/year.

Point is, both are good software that do things a bit differently. I liked KeePass, but I found Bitwarden to do what I wanted better, which was easily sync my passwords across devices without the hassle of self hosting something like Nextcloud. A quick docker container and I’m good.

Maybe some people are fine with keepass and something like Dropbox for sync. And maybe others don’t want to use a public cloud server but also don’t know how or want to host their own instance of a a password manager or cloud server. So they can use something like Bitwarden’s webvault instead, which is free except for TOTP.

[+] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] GadgeteerZA@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it is more about passwords being accessible after hacks etc. What you are referring to, is if Bitwarden were to be hacked, both are accessible. Online Bitwarden has securely hashed all the data, so that is pretty useless if anyone gets it. On my devices I use biometric login, and on desktop a Yubiky as 2FA into Bitwarden. I also have it set to request login every time the browser is restarted, just in case someone were to steal the session data from the browser.

But your point is very valid if a user were to have a weak password for their Bitwarden, or not to have a good 2FA for their Bitwarden login. You want to keep that basket of eggs as safe as you can.