Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> 1Password could have run a good stable company. Instead they took $1B in venture capital, and now need to desperately grow an monetize their user base to justify their $7B valuation.

That is their greedy business decision, and it should not reflect to every one of the password managers. If it costs too much, change service.

However, there is a reason why you would pay for the password manager. They have the highest security requirement from the every app. Their auto-fill properties should not fill to scam websites. They should support every possible machine, like BitWarden for example does, even CLI is there. They should be accessible at any time. Their data can’t be leaked with bad memory managment. Their UX should be designed in a way that everyone graps the idea of good password, and can keep using them. Too often people stop using them, because they are too difficult or clumsy to use.



If they have the highest security requirement of any program, why are you using a closed-source implementation?


My example (BitWarden) is fully open source.

Anyway, open source does not mean that much unless you are able to verify identical releases with reproducible builds.


There is no need for reproducible builds if you just compile it on the user's end.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: