Published version update in app stores
community.bitwarden.com
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...

cross-posted from: https://thelemmy.club/post/57178743

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
    • qweertz@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      4 hours ago

      They never vibe code though:

      This process is fully transparent and open for anyone to see, and it does not change with AI. We take no shortcuts. At KeePassXC, we use AI for two main purposes:

      As an additional pair of “eyes” in code reviews.
      In this function, AI summarises the changes (the least helpful part) and points out implementation errors a human reviewer may have missed. AI reviews don’t replace maintainer code review, nor do they relieve maintainers from their due diligence. AI code reviews complement our existing CI pipelines that perform unit tests, memory checks, and static code analysis (CodeQL). As such, they are a net benefit and make KeePassXC strictly safer. Some examples of AI reviews in action: example 1, example 2.

      For creating pull requests that solve simple and focused issues, add boilerplate code and test cases.
      Unfortunately, some people got the impression that KeePassXC was now being vibe coded. This is wrong. We do not vibe code, and no unreviewed AI code makes it into the code base. Full stop. We have used Copilot agent to draft pull requests, which are then subsequently tweaked in follow-up commits, and reviewed by a maintainer, openly for anyone to see, with the same scrutiny as any other submission. Good pull requests are merged (example), bad pull requests are rejected (example).

      • 5ymm3trY@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        1·
        2 hours ago

        To be honest, I don’t really know where AI assistance stops and vibe coding starts. It was not my intention to say the KeepassXC team now only produces some half-assed unreviewed garbage.

        I use KeepassXC myself, but OP has valid concerns about AI usage in security critical applications and I just wanted to point out that KeepassXC isn’t AI-free either.

    • GreatWhiteBuffalo41@slrpnk.netEnglish
      8·
      2 days ago

      Honestly their description of use and why that use it is not concerning. I’m more concerned with their choice being copilot lol.

    • Rose@slrpnk.netEnglish
      71·
      2 days ago

      Yup, I was supposed to say KeepassXC. (…I mean I probably considered using KeepassX at some point, it’s XC’s predecessor after all. But as I recall Keepass 2 worked well enough on Mono, so I didn’t need to switch.)

      Also, whoopsies on XC’s AI use. At least they don’t seem to embrace it as much as Bitwarden, but still makes me go hmm.