this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2026
299 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

83677 readers
4565 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I can't think of a reason to choose Keepass over Vaultwarden.

[–] john_t@piefed.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you can't selfhost, then you can have your keepass file in your personal cloud. Many basic cloud services are free and the password file itself is encrypted so the cloud provider can't access your passwords.

[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah this is true. FolderSync for cloud and Syncthing for p2p should work nicely.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

(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.~~

[–] chris@l.roofo.cc 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think you misread. Lastweakness was talking about Vaultwarden which is a 100% FOSS reimplementation of bitwarden that you self host.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah i totally did. My bad.

🫠

[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Every pro you listed is applicable to Vaultwarden as well. But I assume you misread it as Bitwarden.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Ah yes, I absolutely did.

My bad.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Vaultwarden, self-hosted is free as well. And since it's not using the Bitwarden infrastructure, you're only as exposed as your own network anyway.

But you can still use all the standard Bitwarden apps and extensions on any device, you just need to point it at your server. Easy to set up for friends and family as well. No need to try and teach them about VPNs, setting up syncthing, etc.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks, I appreciate the clarification. I misread as Bitwarden.

Vaultwarden sounds like it resolves any concerns had about Bitwarden.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I realise now that I can think of one too. Which is that you don't need to host it anywhere if you use something like Syncthing.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Also available offline, all the time in your hands.

[–] besmtt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Bitwarden works offline. Obviously can't save to the server, but reading from what's already on your local machine works just fine.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Isn't it easier then just to use a (keepass) file? Also we carry phones around where we need secrets, too etc.

[–] besmtt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I use keepassXC for work and I only use it on one machine at a time. I don't have any experience syncing it around to multiple devices, so you might have a better perspective than I do on that.

For personal use, I self host vaultwarden and use it on my desktop and Android phone. I'm able to use the bitwarden app just fine on my phone, even when I turn on airplane mode and am unable to sync.

[–] lyralycan@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I set up a simple sync service with FolderSync (similar to Syncthing) on Android for my family, that preserves their mobile files on a server hosted SMB share. Haven't even looked at storage encryption though. You can't underestimate a simple yet effective solution, sometimes so simple it flies under the radar.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I can’t think of a reason to choose Bit/Vaultwarden over Keepass.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Not really and not nearly at the same level

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Lol, no.

The mess of databases you would need to replicate what is simple with organizations and collections is definitely not easier or more flexible.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

lol yes

It’s just one database file

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Web interface, no client software required. I can fire up a brand new machine and access my DB without installing anything.