I dont think its an over reaction. It's pretty common to lock in users by removing or imposing cost on exports. Having an export from today is a lot better than having nothing in 5 years when bitwarden disables exports
I dont think its an over reaction. It's pretty common to lock in users by removing or imposing cost on exports. Having an export from today is a lot better than having nothing in 5 years when bitwarden disables exports
> in 5 years when bitwarden disables exports
i think this is the overreaction - getting worked up about these sort of risks in general isn’t worth your time.
Otherwise you’d end up self-hosting everything strictly on OSS from maintainers you personally know and trust.
This is like someone saying, “don’t use AWS because they might raise prices some day”
I've had the argument so many times with eng managers about how this password manager or that password manager will get hacked or get enshittified and I've been right 100% of the time.
With the escalating abusive practices on display, going towards ‘self hosting everything strictly on OSS’ at least is exactly where this is all going.
Can you name a single password vault that has removed the ability to export, I would say it is a bit of wild speculation to assume this would happen. Even more so as there seems to only be anecdotal and speculative evidence this would happen.
Between the law suits, and the brand damage, there is likely very little upside for a company entertaining this idea.