Use a offline password manager. Problem solved.
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
135 points (88.6% liked)
Technology
81374 readers
4928 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- 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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I pitty the fool that stores anything important on ~~the cloud~~ somebody elses computer.
OMFG can people please fucking go away with this stupid "password managers are worthless" bullshit today. They are exactly as secure as promised, unless you went to the obviously shady ones that use web interfaces. People have been saying this for years, if you want security, keep your password manager offline.
So by that logic BitWarden is unsafe?
Yes, if you arent self hosting the web interface or using the desktop client.
But these issues were patched before even publishing the findings, right?
There is no way to patch the inherent flaw that comes with delivering client software through a web browser. If the entire client is delivered as a web page from a server you dont control, then that server can modify the software however it pleases. Same applies to e2ee encrypted chat clients that run as a web page like element-web (browser based matrix client).
This feels a bit extreme though. Can you even trust anything online at that point? Do you also never leave your home carrying your wallet in case someone might rob you?
Bro i have my bank details, all my private 2FA, work 2FA, health insurance access, my families master passwords, steam access, and more in there. Its literally the most important piece of software that can exist in this day and age. No im not taking chances with that. The only thing you can do with my physical wallet if you rob me is buy something up to 20€ beyond which you need the cards pin. Everything else i can just deactivate by calling the relevant parties.
But on another note, websites have never really been resistant to MITM attacks. So you dont just have to trust the hoster but also everything in between you and them.
I assume you follow proper backup protocol it you are using offline password management.
How do you sync though? You keep one copy on your phone or something, I imagine? What apps and managers are you using?
KeepassXC is the goat :)
The database file is encrypted so its fine to sync it however you like. I use syncthing for it. Obviously set a very good password on it if you sync it through unsecure channels.
according to recent findings, it is.
But the findings were patched before it was even published from my understanding?
not all of them, and some changes only apply to new passwords saved: https://lemmy.ml/comment/24008121
From the paper itself:
We had a video-conference and numerous email exchanges with Bitwarden. At the time of writing, they are well advanced in deploying mitigations for our attacks: BW01, BW03, BW11, BW12 were addressed, the minimum KDF iteration count for BW07 is now 5000, and their roadmap includes completely removing CBC-only encryption, enforcing per-item keys and changing the vault format for integrity. On 22.12.25 they shared with us a draft for a signed organisation membership scheme, which would resolve BW08 and BW09. At our request, to maintain anonymity, they have not yet credited us publicly for the disclosure, but plan to do so.
I didn't look at the response to other Password managers, but the gist here is that the article is overblowing the paper by quite a bit and the majority of the "issues" discovered are either already fixed, or active design decisions.
The beauty of open source
but the gist here is that the article is overblowing the paper by quite a bit and the majority of the "issues" discovered are either already fixed, or active design decisions.
"fixed". only for new and updated passwords
I was also just looking for bitwarden information. Its just the best password manager and has never failed to do its job.
I dont know what they mean with less secure than promised. I didnt expect them to be perfect, and havent read that they promise no security flaws.
They advertise that passwords are only stored on the server in encrypted form, meaning they couldn't read them even if they wanted to (or were forced to by a government agency) and you don't have to trust them not to. This paper shows that several vulnerabilities exist in the protocol which could be exploited by malicious code running on the server (injected by hackers or a government agency), which would then allow an attacker to obtain cleartext-passwords. So you do, in fact, have to trust the servers integrity.
Thank you for taking the time to understand and comment, very valuable.
tl;dr:
- If the password manager server is hacked and compromised, then syncing your passwords with the compromised server will lead to compromised passwords (duh)
- None of the providers tested have (or have had in the past) compromised servers.
and an observation or two:
- Vaultwarden is free, self-hostable, and doesn't rely on trust in a third party.
- Keepass (and its client variants, like KeepassXC which is pretty great) is even more secure because there is no server, just an encrypted file you can store anywhere.
These attacks can happen through server impersonation as well. The actual cloud servers need not be compromised, just the user's browser has to be. This attack can then leak passwords and allow malicious parties to even gain access on the actual cloud servers apparently.
Keepass (and its client variants, like KeepassXC which is pretty great) is even more secure because there is no server, just an encrypted file you can store anywhere.
And simultaneously less secure because it's up to you to handle keeping your vault synced between various devices and most people are significantly worse at keeping systems secure than the professionals at the password managers.
Self hosting a server of some kind or using something like Keepass on a single device (with offline backups) is the most secure option, but as usual with security doing so trades significant convenience for security. For most people who are uninterested in making sure their servers are kept up to date week to week letting professionals handle it is the better option.
I store my keypass database on several flash drives in different physical locations and update them several times per year to make sure that even if I do lose the copy I have, the versions on the flash drives, not at my physical location, are decently up to date, and so if I do lose any of the password data, it will be only for a couple of months worth if that.
If I add things that are extremely important, such as a new mortgage provider, or some sort of financial data into my keypass database, then I do an unscheduled immediate update to all of my flash drives in different physical locations to make sure that they all have that, but if it's just a social media account, and I was to lose access to it, and not have the password for it, then... I wouldn't be too upset about it.
In the absolute worst possible case, I stand to lose 3 months worth of data. It's not often that I have to tweak stuff in my password manager, so that would be very few changes.
Sure, but at the end of the day even if you don't update your vaultwarden server or you rely on an insecure storage sync system like dropbox, your actual vault is encrypted with a key that only you know. Even if your server is hacked or the kdbx is leaked, your passwords are safe until someone breaks AES.
Contrast that with hosted services, who could very easily attach their own keys to your encryption key (whether now or in the future at the behest of the state) and you'd be none the wiser. E2EE doesn't matter much when the other end is controlled by someone else.
I'm not disagreeing that most people just want something to work without thinking about, and for that reason I'm glad that services like bitwarden and lastpass and protonpass exist. My intent was not FUD, just shining a light on the fact that keeping your passwords secure does not require trusting a company.
Sure, but at the end of the day even if you don't update your vaultwarden server or you rely on an insecure storage sync system like dropbox, your actual vault is encrypted with a key that only you know. Even if your server is hacked or the kdbx is leaked, your passwords are safe until someone breaks AES.
not really the case: https://lemmy.ml/comment/24008121
Contrast that with hosted services, who could very easily attach their own keys to your encryption key
how would official Bitwarden be able to accomplish that? apart from this vulnerability, they can't use their servers to add their own keys.
For people interested there were 3 cloud based password managers tested and this is what they found
The researchers demonstrated 12 attacks on Bitwarden, 7 on LastPass and 6 on Dashlane.
Is there a reason why these attacks were on cloud based pw managers?
The method, they use, requires a client-server architecture. Hence, they cannot attack a local keepass file even if you sync it to some cloud.
From what I scanned, there was no reason given on why they only attacked cloud based providers.
My guess is that these are paid ones and thus have a 'market share', easier to attack etc.
If you attack a 'keepass' password the attack vector is more crypto / memory based as far as my limited knowledge goes and not some funky inbetween attack.
Also, if you attack a cloud base provides, you will most likely have multiple victims per breach / exploit, whilst offline are targeted and thus not so interesting in most cases unless we're talking about a person of interest
they ran the test on those pw managers because they were open source. that allowed the testers to implement a "dummy" provider on their own "compromised server." so the results of failing the tests are based on the hypothetical situation of "what if bitwarden (or whoever) had an entire server taken over by hackers". while the chances of that happening are greater than zero, it would take a lot for someone to completely hijack a server like that
edit to add-- these tests are one of the reasons these pw managers choose to be open source: to allow 3rd party tests like this to find vulnerabilities, so they can be fixed
nothing is 100% guaranteed safe, but if you don't want to remember or write down dozens or hundreds of unique strong passwords, i still would recommend a pw manager
Oh okay so they probably delivered malicious code to the user entering their passwords... Well even an offline pw manager can be compromised in the code.
That's where most of the passwords are
Unfortunately they don't explain what the attacks were in the article. Gonna need to find the paper to know.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Copy pasting a comment that I saw on Reddit
——
Link to the original study (with a less sensationalized title):
A few important notes:
-
the study is about Bitwarden, LastPass, Dashlane and 1Password. Proton Pass isn't mentioned.
-
the study presumes that they're working with a malicious server (read this as compromised server, controlled by an attacker). The attacks they talk about in the article would not work on a normal server. Here's their quote:
No need to panic: all of our attacks presume a malicious server. We have no reason to believe that the password manager vendors are currently malicious or compromised, and as long as things stay that way, your passwords are safe. That said, password managers are high-value targets, and breaches do happen.
- Here's another quote, about other password managers:
You can ask your provider the following questions:
- Do you offer end-to-end encryption? What security do you provide in case your server infrastructure were to be compromised?
- How do you check that public keys and public-key ciphertexts are authentic?
- How do you authenticate security-critical settings, such as the KDF type and the iteration count?
- Do you provide integrity guarantees for a user's vault as a whole? Can a malicious server add items to your vault?
You can also ask your favourite password manager to commission an audit checking for our attacks in their products.
- If you still feel unsure/unsafe, then adopt an offline password manager (I highly recommend keepassXC).
Does anyone still talk about Keeper password manager? I feel like I used to hear about that one a lot, and now it has just disappeared off of the face of the earth.
I too recommend KeepassXC, works even on android with KeepassDX. I use syncthing to sync between devices (work, personal and android)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Wish they did an assessment on Proton pass. I just started using all proton services and wanted to know how that holds up. My company uses Bitwarden 🙃
Bitwarden have published a blog addressing this audit:
view more: next ›