You can always ask the guy why
1 Like
I might need to do that 
So I just asked them on Twitter and they said that they require this in order to provide update notices and (if enabled) offer push-notifications. It’s fine by them to use a fake email and turn these features that rely on their service off, in which case the ID will only be used once during the install to verify it. This also enables them to see how popular self-hosting is.
So, not as standalone as I’d hoped, but I guess it’s acceptable.
3 Likes
Does it require registration on their site for each account or just the “root” account?
Thats good to know. It is beta, I imagine it could be made more standalone, especialy for networks where that kind of talkback even for just install wouldnt be allowed.
I think for the options out there ive only found two good open options, keepass and the horrible management around it if you want to sync things, and bitwarden (for now) that is essentially a lastpass type equivilant. Im quite happy with how its going development wise at the moment.
I just asked him about strict networks on your tweet 
@SgtAwesomesauce just the person managing it i think
3 Likes
I’m going to do a review of it, from an IT operations perspective, when I finish deploying and testing it.
3 Likes
There’s also KeePassXC a community spin of KeepassX. It works with passIFox (using Mono), or their own browser extension, however it is not supported for the main version of KeePassXC at the moment, you need a development version of KeePassXC, however, it is not far in the works to get into the main verison.