They have totally different design goals which is why Bitwarden is more resource-hungry and more complex to deploy. Bitwarden can scale up to large use cases such as companies with hundreds of thousands of employees (it’s what they run on the hosted version, after all), whereas Vaultwarden is designed to be small and light for home use cases where you almost always have <10 users total.
A good alternative to keepass is a self hosted vaultwarden btw. (compiled from bitwardens opensource code iirc)
Vaultwarden is not compiled from Bitwarden’s code, it’s a separate project and codebase but designed to be compatible with Bitwarden’s API.
Bitwarden is open source and you can self-host it but IIRC it’s a bit more complex and resource-hungry than Vaultwarden.
They have totally different design goals which is why Bitwarden is more resource-hungry and more complex to deploy. Bitwarden can scale up to large use cases such as companies with hundreds of thousands of employees (it’s what they run on the hosted version, after all), whereas Vaultwarden is designed to be small and light for home use cases where you almost always have <10 users total.
I agree. But I think is much easier for people to use KeePass compared to self hosting Vaultwarden
Nothing can beat passwords written on paper though
Scissors can.
So I will write them on a rock, instead.
But paper beats rock
I was talking about digital espionage, assuming one is not stupid enough to record their offline passwords digitally
But rock beats scissors. What if paper has an alliance with rock to be protected from scissors in return for paper not covering rock?
Physical access can. Indentations on the below page can. Fire and moisture can. Someone looking over your shoulder can.