I’m going to move away from lastpass because the user experience is pretty fucking shit. I was going to look at 1pass as I use it a lot at work and so know it. However I have heard a lot of praise for BitWarden and VaultWarden on here and so probably going to try them out first.

My questions are to those of you who self-host, firstly: why?

And how do you mitigate the risk of your internet going down at home and blocking your access while away?

BitWarden’s paid tier is only $10 a year which I’m happy to pay to support a decent service, but im curious about the benefits of the above. I already run syncthing on a pi so adding a password manager wouldn’t need any additional hardware.

  • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fully agreed.

    Accessing Vaultwarden through a VPN gives me peace of mind that it can’t be attacked.

    Another great thing about Bitwarden is that it’s possible to export locally cached passwords to (encrypted) json/csv. This makes recovery possible even if all backups were gone.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Accessing Vaultwarden through a VPN

      Hmm maybe I should move mine to my VPN. Currently I have it publicly accessible so I can access it from systems where I can’t run other VPNs for security reasons (work systems). I use a physical token with FIDO2 (Yubikey) for two factor authentication though, so I’m not too worried about unauthorized access.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Vaultwarden is one of the few services I’d actually trust to be secure, so I wouldn’t worry if you update timely to new versions.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I hope it gets security audited one day, like Bitwarden was.

          • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Because they use the official apps/web-vault, they don’t need to implement most of the vault/encryption features, so at least the actual data should be fine.

            Security audits are expensive, so I don’t expect it to happen, unless some sponsor pays for it.

            They have processes for CVEs and it seems like there wasn’t any major security issues (altough I wouldn’t host a public instance for unknown users).

            • dan@upvote.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s a good point. I didn’t consider the fact that all the encryption is done client-side, so that’s the most important part to audit (which Bitwarden has already done).

      • k4j8@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I have my Vaultwarden public so I can use it at work too, but my firewall blocks all external IPs except my work’s IP.

        • kratoz29@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hmm, interesting, how would I start doing this?

          I use a Synology NAS BTW, so it already gives me a Synology subdomain to mess around.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yes, Bitwarden browser plugins require TLS, so I use DNS challenge to get a cert without an open port 80/443.

        The domain points to a local IP, so I can’t access it without the VPN.

        Having everything behind a reverse proxy makes it much easier to know which services are open, and I only need to open port 80/443 on my servers firewall.