RyanL Bitwarden Employee
Hello everyone!
Starting in the next release, the Bitwarden apps published to the various stores will be the commercially licensed builds. No action is needed, and the apps will work exactly as they do today.
Bitwarden remains committed to open source security and transparency
The GPLv3 OSS licensed version continues to be updated and published on GitHub
All current features are available in both versions
License details are on GitHub
Bitwarden remains committed to a robust, free forever plan for everyone
If you have any questions, please ask them in this thread. Thanks all!
EDIT:
Bitwarden is not going closed-source
You can still fork Bitwarden
No change to self-hosting, the licensing change affects those who are repackaging and reselling Bitwarden
The free plan is here to stay permanently
Well, we all know how this ends…
It’s a really sad day for me, I love Bitwarden, it’s easily the best password manager I’ve used, and I’m in IT, I’ve used a bunch.
Fuck private equity, fuck it to death. But until then, I’ll be moving my test setup for KeyPassXC into production over the coming weeks and months.
I was happily subscribed to Bitwarden for years for my personal account, I moved several people and a whole company onto it’s platform. We had a good run, time to move on.
100% but move where? I’m not going to self host something this critical. KeypassX is so much worse. I can’t even use it on mobile probably.
You can use KeePass on mobile, look for KeePassDX on fdroid.
I guess we’re gonna see more open-source apps soon, aimed at Vaultwarden first
@Mustachius_Grumpius “The GPLv3 OSS licensed version continues to be updated and published on GitHub
All current features are available in both versions
License details are on GitHub
Bitwarden remains committed to a robust, free forever plan for everyone”
deleted by creator
- Embrace
- Extend
- Extinguish
I swear most of Grafana’s new features are enterprise only now
yeah but its typical double speak
Why do you think so?
deleted by creator
all “current” features. further down its asked about the future and they arent always clear but the fo state there wont be feature parity moving forward
Yup. All CURRENT, these will start to diverge…
If there is no intention to put the screws to the user base, then why do it on the first place?
We all know how this game ends when venture capital gets involved.
@flop_leash_973 Where are the screws here?
Split versions is usually the first step. Many projects have done so before. Next year there will be some technical reason they can’t keep feature parity with the commercial repository, and it will drift from the OSS repository. Oops, we broke compatibility, sowwy guys. A couple of years later the OSS repository will be closed because it is a security risk. By that point the company and management would’ve drifted so far from the initial values of the project that people won’t notice. Those who cared will have jumped ship to alternatives sooner, those who noticed later will be already too deep into depending on the software that they will keep paying the subscription.
I have no evidence, but I also don’t have any doubts this is the plan.
I kinda thought the paid plan already had extra features no? Like silly ones but I swear it isn’t just donations right?
It had cloud storage, built in TOTP with autofill, and some had features like organizations and sharing
Still, this fucking sucks. Bitwarden was literally created as a ln answer to this shit happening to LastPass and Dashlane.
I get it because minio dying burned me hard but so long as it keeps operating as it does now do we need more features? I would be fine with a continuously secure version of exactly what it does now. I kinda hate feature bloat
If it’s not getting security updates and it’s not ona completely airgapped sysyem it’s a huge liability. Especially something that lives at the storage level.
Aren’t there forks being maintained? I was looking at implementing it right before it went enshitty, and I could have sworn there were alternatives…
I meant features on Bitwarden etc. meaning maintenance to me on an app like this is fine. Minio happened too quickly for good alternatives to exist but yes people jumped on getting some together pretty quickly.
It was, if anything, lesson in treating a single FOSS as a solved problem.
Sure, it’s no change for self hosters currently, but it’s one more step in moving towards a more closed platform overall. I do hope more FOSS client apps end up getting made sometime soon. I’ve been using Keyguard on Android for some time, which means the recent several breaking changes in the Bitwarden apps to the Vaultwarden backend haven’t hit me as hard, but I do still use the official apps for my laptop and desktop and Keyguard isnt fully FOSS, of course. I’d love to see some forks or brand new apps one of these days that are actually fully FOSS for both mobile and browsers. I’ve thought about doing some myself, but I have too many other projects and I also don’t have a MAC or want to pay the fees to make an iPhone version. And I abandoned my Android Developer account when they started the identity nonsense, so none of my apps are on the official store anymore and Fdroid and similar may not be viable soon, so it would only really be for myself and a few others who use alternate Android OS’s.
It is effectively going closed source
Shoot
How so
They don’t make any money off of the open source version. It is just a matter of the before they “discontinue” the open source version and move to source available.
If you have any doubts just look at Redis, Vagrant or Terraform
deleted by creator
Yeah we have seen the same process many times now.
I really hope they don’t go that route.
A different licence for the commercial version isn’t a bad thing in se, in my opinion
Heh, I’m looking at you to those people that looked at me weird because I told them I was good with Keepass!
So, Vaultwarden it is?
This seems to be clients for the end devices, which I’m worried may actually be a move towards locking out VaultWarden which will uses the BW Clients
deleted by creator
are u gonna maintain clients?
deleted by creator
Are they still going to publish the Android client app via their own F-Droid repository?
As always, people overreacting in the comments (of the linked forum). So the current plan is that the core remains OSS, but upcoming features are partially not. To me that sounds similar to Chrome’s or VSCode’s approach.
Be cautious in such cases is not overreacting. We’ve seen enough open to closed rug pulls in the last years.
Fucking minIO
yeah sorry I dont want that
I’m not saying that’s great news, but it doesn’t sound like the self destruction move that some OSS companies have done recently. I wouldn’t migrate away just because of that change. In the end, they have to find a sustainable mode of operation.
They are going to slowly strip features from the free version over time.
It’s 2026 and you have way too much optimism left after all the OSS rug pulls of the last six fucking years.
Even hardware rugpulled. Fucking Micron.
Forget it; BitWarden is cooked.
So the current plan is that the core remains OSS
… for now.
Embrace, Enhance, Extinguish.
*: got the E’s in the wrong order
It’s not overreacting when you have seen the same development at least 10 times before. Its called experience.
So it’s open core now? As if this would be any better.
What’s the benefit for them to change the license?
commercial providers can’t fork and sell it and give nothing back to the OSS community.
So basically they were getting undercut by people reselling the same a services under a different name.
And not having to do R&D
No, that would GPL. The benefit for them is that some features will be paid and won’t be unlockable just by using Vaultwarden
it literally says in the post that the license change affects companies who are repackaging and reselling bitwarden, but ok.
What differences will exist between the two parallel versions?
Some future components will be published under the commercial license and will exist only in that build. Newly developed features will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for which license applies to them.
source: the page linked by OP, https://community.bitwarden.com/t/published-version-update-in-app-stores/102750/4
Money
I pay for their product and its totally worth. It was $10 for the longest time and much like everything in the last few years has increased price to what it is actually worth. To be honest $20 a year is still stupid cheap and worth it to keep them developing the product. Bitwarden is also one of the few password managers that hasn’t had a user data breach.
There is no way I’m self hosting something this important… So now I’m not sure what to do actually.
That’s why I’m just using KeePass. It’s just an encrypted file that you can store on whatever storage you want and sync with existing solutions like Syncthing etc.
Yes it’s a bit finicky when you edit the file on multiple devices before they’ve synced but it works very well for me…
If self hosting is not an option. Ideas that come to mind:
Evaluate what it is worth to you and maybe pay for it, if they offer enough worth to you and it is affordable.
Then there are people who host it and provide it to others. Together with other apps, as a suite. Maybe that’s an option. But I suppose, donating or paying is expected here, too.
Or switch to another solution. Preferably one with an import feature.
Does anyone have a handy guide to switching to selfhosted version? I was considering doing that but I let my plan renew out of laziness.
Here it explains some self host options with links to “Get Started” for each:
https://bitwarden.com/help/self-host-bitwarden/
For example, here’s the link to “Linux standard deployment”
https://bitwarden.com/help/install-on-premise-linux/
You may also want to consider not making your server available to the open internet, and instead access it only on your LAN via VPN.
That or jump to Vaultwarden https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden
Is there another client we can use with vaultwarden though? (In the scenario wgere that gets locked down)
The web interface is hosted directly by your vaultwarden interface so it’s not lockdown-able. The only things that are would be the browser extension and phone apps. Both of which are formally unnecessary because you can always just use the web interface. I’m sure if they ever locked down there’d be community versions in no time as they’re basically just web wrappers anyway.
The apps keep a synced local copy, so if the server is down or unreachable you can still get to your passwords. That can also be locked by biometrics etc.
There’s a lot of stuff that without be lost by going to just the web interface
The web app keeps a local synced copy too btw. Biometric is fair tho
Ah of course, perhaps i’ll give that a go and see how it goes.
There is an iOS app for Vaultwarden. Under that name.
https://apps.apple.com/za/app/vaultwarden-password-manager/id6799711599
Don’t see one for Android. And for the rest I just online.
Vaultwarden still depends on upstream bitwarden
Only if you’re using the Android app or the web browser plugin, the actual core system does not.
They could lock Bitwarden out tomorrow and Valtwarden would still work fine.
Then people would just have to write specific application and plugin if they wanted to continue to use it with no change.
The web interface would be fine.
The web interface is from bitwarden. Technically they could fork it but that would be much more work.
No it is not, the web interface is the page you get when you browse to the swrver directly, it is very different from the Bitwarden one.
The web interface is based on bitwarden. You are thinking of the client api.
great suggestion
Can I simply migrate content from Bitwarden to Vaultwarden?
I couldn’t tell from looking at the faq or wiki.
It’s been a long while, but I believe you just export from Bitwarden and import into Vaultwarden.
deleted by creator
My knowledge of network security is very limited, right now I only self-host things like movies, music, ROMs, etc. I would love to do the same with my passwords, but I don’t think I would feel comfortable doing it with such sensitive data.
A viable concern if you wanted to put it public-facing. If you only care about syncing when you’re home, though, you should be able to host it perfectly fine just not giving any pathways in from the outside world.
If you wanted to use the Android application, you would have to learn about TLS certificates anyway, because it doesn’t work without HTTPS.
Works fine with acme certs though
I’m personally using Let’s Encrypt and duckdns.org for a completely free solution.
Currently only hosting everything on my local network though with VPN to access when not at home.
Fine to me as long as this doesnt impact Vaultwarden
