Mabits vs Bitwarden

Bitwarden is a good password manager. Here is where Mabits differs.

Bitwarden is open source, independently audited and on every platform you use. Mabits is newer, narrower and unaudited — and it is built for a threat Bitwarden’s sharing keys do not answer yet. This page compares the two honestly, including the rows Mabits loses.

Open your vault Move from Bitwarden

What actually differs

Sharing that a quantum computer cannot open

Both encrypt your own vault symmetrically, and a quantum computer does not break AES-256 in either. The difference is sharing: Bitwarden hands keys between accounts with RSA-2048, which Shor’s algorithm breaks outright, and Mabits uses X25519 and ML-KEM-768 together, so a shared item needs both broken.

Ciphertext recorded today can be kept until the day it can be read. That is why the difference matters now rather than then.

A memory-hard key derivation by default

Bitwarden derives your key with PBKDF2 by default and offers Argon2id as an option. Mabits uses Argon2id by default, so guessing a master password costs an attacker memory as well as time — the resource that makes specialised cracking hardware expensive.

Nothing third-party in the browser

Mabits’ web client runs no third-party code at all. The post-quantum cryptography is written in this project and checked against NIST’s vectors, the rest is the browser’s own, and the page holding your vault may not load anything from another origin.

The scorecard, including the rows Mabits loses

The same table the home page shows, kept in the repository and checked by the build — so it cannot quietly drop a row that stopped being flattering.

Mabits compared with Bitwarden, by dimension
Dimension	Bitwarden	Mabits today
Asymmetric crypto	RSA-2048	Hybrid X25519 + ML-KEM-768
Symmetric crypto	AES-256-CBC + HMAC	AES-256-GCM, a single AEAD primitive
Password KDF	PBKDF2-600k by default	Argon2id by default
Crypto dependencies	Third-party libraries	Zero
Client runtime dependencies	A large tree	Zero third-party in the browser
Supply-chain policy	Conventional	Enforced in CI, zero marketplace actions
Platform coverage	All platforms	Web and a Chromium extension. No mobile client, no CLI — materially worse
Audited	Yes, repeatedly	No. Scheduled, not done

When Bitwarden is the better choice today

If any of these matter more to you than post-quantum sharing, Bitwarden is the right answer for now, and this page would rather say so than lose your trust later.

You need a phone app or a command line. Mabits runs in the browser and as a Chromium extension; Bitwarden runs everywhere.
You need an independent audit. Bitwarden has been audited, more than once. Mabits has not, yet.
You run an organisation with single sign-on or directory sync. Mabits has organisations and sharing, and no SSO, SCIM or device approval.

What Mabits has, and what it does not yet

Built and usable

Six item types, folders, tags, search and a trash that counts down
Sharing and organisations, sealed to the recipient’s own key
Send, emergency access, TOTP, passkeys and attachments
Import and export, recovery keys, two-step, PIN and biometric unlock
Vault re-keying, for the day a device is lost
A web client and a Chromium extension

Not there yet

No iOS or Android app — the shared core is ported, the shells are not
No command-line client, deliberately last
A desktop app that is built but not yet shipped
No third-party security audit, and no bug bounty
English only, because a half-translated vault is worse than none
No enterprise administration — no SSO, no SCIM, no device approval

Moving from Bitwarden takes one file

Export your vault from Bitwarden as unencrypted JSON and open it in Mabits. Logins, notes, cards, identities, custom fields and folders come across, the file is read on your device, and you see every item before anything is saved.

Open your vault to import Why post-quantum matters