I use it currently, but I’ve seen a few people say it’s bad for privacy or something? Is this true? If so, what alternatives do you suggest?
Bitwarden uses MicroSoft SQL Server as the only DB server option.
It is also the one they run on their main service, so it is not fully FLOSS and I would not consider that DB server reliable at all given its nature.
As Helix pointed before, there is a fully FLOSS replacement compatible with API and clients called Vaultwarden, which is also written in Rust and allow MySQL/MariaDB and PostgreSQL DB servers AFAIR.
Ahhh, that must be what people meant; the Microsoft thing.
Bitwarden is fine from a privacy standpoint so keep using it if you like it.
alternatives
I use and recommend KeePassXC.
It’s good yes. Though one thing I don’t like I’d that when you want to access just one password, the whole vault is available unencrypted and there’s a risk it can be read from memory. But this is a worry in all password managers afaik.
That’s nonsense, bitwarden is great for privacy and the best password manager for casual users.
KeePassXC is also a great contender. But I agree that Bitwarden rocks. (if you selfhost Vaultwarden even more)
Yep, unless you want to use something like Keepass and roll your own sync with something like syncthing, then I think Bitwarden is really good.
Pretty good solution imho.
Keepass XC and Syncthing is exactly what I do and it’s been amazing.
That isn’t true. BitWarden is a very good password manager. Great apps on all platforms (even terminal) with perfect sync.
I’d you don’t trust the main BitWarden.com server, then you can run the official server, or the lighter and community recommended vaultwarden server. It’s tiny, easy to deploy and effective.
Edit: links
I would assume the individuals who claimed BitWarden has privacy issues are not very well versed on the topic. If you wanted to check out some alternatives, a site I trust has the four highest rated password managers/generators from a security and privacy standpoint to be: BitWarden, LessPass, KeePassXC & Spectre. LessPass and Spectre generate passwords with no storage needs though. BitWarden is audited four times each year by a third party and I have only ever seen surface level issues identified which are always quickly amended.
LessPass and Spectre are really bad ideas. They sounded cool to me too until I thought about it more.
If your password for one site is compromised, you can’t change it, ever, which is already a dealbreaker. Moreover, the algorithm for creating the password is very fast - which means that if someone finds out your password for one service, they can brute force your master password extremely fast relative to other password managers. And they don’t even need access to your vault. Keep in mind, I’m not a security expert at all so I might be wrong about this.
Bitwarden and Keepass XC are the only password managers I recommend because attackers need access to your vault/database to be able to crack anything, and the cryptography used is intentionally slow as to make brute forcing less practical. The most ideal is to self host or use an offline database like Keepass does, which makes the risk of your database being compromised practically zero unless you’re some high profile target.
There’s an Open Source implementation called Vaultwarden. You should certainly export your passwords from Bitwarden so they can’t keep them hostage.
Alternatives include Passbolt (no offline client, weird French crypto implementation of RSA), KeePassXC (best for single users, not good for sharing) and QtPass/gopass/pass (best solution if you are very proficient with GPG and like the command line).
You should certainly export your passwords from Bitwarden so they can’t keep them hostage.
imo your tone is a bit blowing this out of proportion, you can stay on the free tier, pay regularly for a very good service or even self-host. they are not keeping your password “hostage”.
Yes, that’s why I said you should export the passwords regularly, so they can not hold them hostage. Whether they currently do it or just remove some features when you stop paying is irrelevant since they could change that tomorrow.
What do you mean by “keep them hostage”? Why would they do that?
You pay for their service and when you stop paying, you lose access to the passwords you didn’t synchronise to your local client before that happens.
I use the free personal plan myself.
It’s absolutely the best password manager a person could invest in, they’ve had it for years and have never had any issues with breaches or anything else unlike the competition.
I use Bitwarden. It is easy and simple to use.
Can you provide more details? We cannot debate if there are no detailed claims.
It was mainly just passing gossip about them being affiliated with Google or something. I couldn’t find anything on the topic, and I didn’t necessarily believe the claims. I just thought I’d ask here just in case.
I trust Bitwarden. And even if they use Google analytics does not make them untrustworthy. It would be something that needs to be improved.
Centralized services are questionable for privacy in general. That’s especially true for a password manager, where if the service is compromised in a way that leaks your passwords then all of your accounts are compromised.
If you’re at all worried about potentially being profiled by governmental actors as a privacy concern, I’d keep as far away from hosted password managers and email as possible. There’s no such thing as a hosted service that doesn’t share information with the government on request and both of those services immediately give away the whole game if compromised.
