the main difference is architecture: shardium splits the secret (shamir) so the server never holds the full data, whereas vaultwarden holds the full encrypted vault.
also the "grandma factor": getting non-tech family to setup a vaultwarden account was friction. this is just "find paper in drawer, scan qr".
running 4-of-2 definitely removes the service dependency.
you highlighted exactly the "bug" i wanted to patch though: the collusion risk. if beneficiary A and B have a beer together, you get rugged.
the "live service" here acts purely as a time-lock. beneficiaries can't collude to rob you today because the 3rd shard isn't released until the dead man's switch actually triggers. it protects you from your own friends.
You should consider highlighting that this can be used for way more than crypto wallets. The seed phrase can be used to restore a GPG key, a FIDO2 authenticator including SSH/WebAuthn, etc.
100%. i actually use it for my gpg keys too. i need to make that clearer on the landing page so it doesn't look like a "crypto-only" tool. recovering ssh/fido2 backups is a huge use case. thanks for the feedback
the main difference is architecture: shardium splits the secret (shamir) so the server never holds the full data, whereas vaultwarden holds the full encrypted vault.
also the "grandma factor": getting non-tech family to setup a vaultwarden account was friction. this is just "find paper in drawer, scan qr".
reply