Technology

60058 readers

2090 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

626

Concerns Raised Over Bitwarden Moving Further Away From Open-Source (www.phoronix.com)

submitted 2 months ago by AsudoxDev@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

203 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 77 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, it's Bitwarden right now. This move signals their intent to change that, though.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

so the "no longer open source" means they'll be moving to a saas model or something? i'm not super cybersecurity savvy but bitwarden is what i use

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 73 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No, technically they already are SaaS company. That's mostly how they make their money.

Also it should be noted "no longer open source" doesn't mean they've done a "our code is now closed and all your passwords are ours" rug pull like some other corporations. This is a technical concern with the license and it no longer meets proper FOSS standards (in other words, it has a restriction on it now that you wouldn't see in, for example, the GPL).

So by and large the change is very minimal, the code is still available, it's still the best option. However, this does matter. It may be a sign of the company changing directions. It's something they should get pushback about.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The SDK was never FOSS, and was never under the GPL. Hence why they can add the text mentioned in the article. You don't get to change the text of a FOSS license to begin with. It isn't unheard of for text like this to be part of proprietary software that integrates with and uses FOSS that are under different licenses.

That said, this is concerning, but whether it changes BW's FOSS state is a matter of legal bickering that has been going on for decades.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 months ago

You can’t retroactively change FOSS licensing, but oft times you can alter the licensing moving forward. Not always the case, of course. But in no way are all FOSS licenses set in stone.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

From the update, it looks like they consider it a bug, which they're working to resolve. Let's see how they resolve it before jumping to conclusions.