this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
627 points (87.4% liked)

Technology

59985 readers
2109 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ghostface@lemmy.world 85 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Vaultwarden updated link

Open source version of bitwarden written in rust.

Where is the foundation to support foss?!?

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 53 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If they're moving away from open source/more monetisation then they're going to do one of two things.

1: Make the client incompatible (e.g you'll need to get hold of and prevent updating of a current client).
2: DMCA the vaultwarden repo

If they're going all-in on a cash grab, they're not going to make it easy for you to get a free version.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 27 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Don't forget option 3: someone writes a vaultwarden client independent of the closed-source crap.

If you can write a server that fully supports the client via the documented API, then you know everything you'd need to do to make a client as well.

[–] humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

That’s not a third option in the same list (things they are going to do), it’s an item in an entirely different list (foss responses to their actions).

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You can't "dmca" the fork that was created while it was still open source. They could only prevent it from getting future updates (directly from them).

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 5 points 1 month ago

If you mean they shouldn't. I'd agree. But, as has been seen a lot on youtube. "They" can DMCA anything they want, and the only route out is usually to take them to court.

I mean I'd hope if they're going in this direction they will be decent about it. But, it's not the way things seem to be lately.

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

DMCA is a tool for suppression of free information. It doesn't require evidence that you've made a good faith effort to consider fair use or other legal complexity as it's meant to take down the information before that is settled in court, but most commonly used to suppress information from a person or group who can't afford to fight it in court. Microsoft's Github has a history of delete first without risking their own necks to stand up for obviously fraudulent takedowns much less ones with unsettled law like APIs/SDKs.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 26 points 2 months ago

You have your link formatted backwards. It should be Vaultwarden, with the link in the parentheses.

[–] ghostface@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

This is by no means to a slight towards bitwarden. Solid product and community