#EU vs #browser vendors: “one has to be able to pick browser and search engine”. Actually that does not solve anything, and shows only that politicians know nothing about #software. More effective enforcement would be “one has to be able to pick a provider for the sync feature of a browser”.

Two relatively recent incidents that have limited the choice here:

1. #Chromium was blocked from #Google sync.
2. #GNOME Web was blocked from #Firefox sync.

#politics

@jarkko Yes and also manifest V3 prevented extensions from local storing passwords, which soft-blocked lots of third party password vaults. (In my case, I use Buttercup. I had to install its standalone desktop app, which runs a daemon, which the manifestV3 chrome extension has to query for password storage. I even use firefox but they imposed the same workflow on me :_( )

@elrohir did not know this but neither big surprises here :-)

I have two-folded approach:

1. My main secret/password vault is https://www.passwordstore.org/.
2. I use sync features as password caches and empty them annually. So I have password “in rotation” in the browser.

@jarkko I suppose what I wanted was not that common: a browser extension with a vault in encrypted in local file storage; which then I will sync across devices *using a separate cloud solution of my choice*. I tried the most famous services such as bitwarden or protonpass but they all store vaults in their own cloud. Buttercup is not that big really.

Apparently this approach was minoritarian enough that they didn't even consider it necessary to let it live in manifestV3.

@jarkko I still have all passwords duplicate in firefox sync, I'm just keeping a local vault in parallel to reserve my right to wipe my firefox account in case they diverge from my position.

I like the pass command utility a lot. If I had known about it when I started with buttercup I might have chosen differently. Thanks for sharing.

@elrohir All my password in Firefox sync are duplicates as browser sync works me only as a cache ;-)