Authy vs Bitwarden

Agent access

1. ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed9/10

   Bitwarden serves a live llms.txt at bitwarden.com/llms.txt (HTTP 200) with structured content, and help pages ship real per-page markdown mirrors (e.g., cli.md) confirming genuine agent-oriented documentation rather than a stub. This is directly confirmed by runtime probes, not just claims. Missing for 10: no independent third-party corroboration of an agent actually consuming these docs end-to-end in a workflow.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://bitwarden.com/llms.txt # Bitwarden > The most trusted open source password manager for passwords, passk…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): bitwarden.com serves a live llms.txt ('# Bitwarden — The most trusted open source password manager...')…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed8/10

   Bitwarden ships an official CLI with API-key authentication explicitly documented as suitable for automated workflows/CI, plus a Public API for org automation and a headless 'bw serve' mode confirmed at runtime. missing for 10: no CI-specific tutorial/example pipeline (e.g., GitHub Actions) in evidence, and one community report notes CLI 'bw list' unexpectedly dumping plaintext secrets, a minor safety caveat for automation use.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed9/10

   Bitwarden ships a first-party, GPL-3.0 MCP server (bitwarden/mcp-server) published to npm, and a runtime probe confirms it completes a full stdio handshake, showing it works as documented rather than just being an announcement. Missing for 10: independent third-party review of the MCP server's tool set/security beyond the vendor probe.

   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://github.com/bitwarden/mcp-server”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userUse an official CLI

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed9/10

   Bitwarden ships a documented, fully-featured official CLI (bw) with vault management, API key auth for automated workflows, and a runtime-verified 'bw serve' mode exposing a local REST API well-suited to agentic/AI use. missing for 10: independent third-party benchmarking of agent integration quality beyond one community anecdote about plaintext output behavior.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://bitwarden.com/help/cli/”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

5. ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted2/10

   Twilio's own docs describe an SDK/API for integrating Authy (authy-docs-1, authy-docs-13), but a direct probe of the same page shows the Authy API is deprecated and 'closed to new customers' with 'no programmatic surface remains open to new integrations' (authy-probe-rt-1), meaning an AI-native user cannot actually drive Authy via a documented public API today. Missing for 10: an open, actively maintained public API for new integrations, migration path documentation usable by AI agents, and independent confirmation of working programmatic access.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [claimed-docs] “So you don't have to use the Authy API directly to integrate two-factor authentication into your app, we provide an SDK for common web langu…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed8/10

   Bitwarden documents a Public API for organization management (bitwarden-docs-8), a personal API key for automated/programmatic access (bitwarden-docs-9), and a full-featured CLI (bitwarden-docs-7, bitwarden-probe-4) with a documented `bw serve` REST mode enabling agent-driven vault access (bitwarden-probe-rt-1); this constitutes a documented public API surface an AI-native user could drive. missing for 10: a public OpenAPI/swagger spec resolves 404 on probed endpoints (bitwarden-probe-2), and one community report flags a CLI safety/UX issue (bitwarden-comm-13) showing rough edges in automation ergonomics.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://bitwarden.com/openapi.json, https://bitwarden.com/swagger.json, https://bitwarden.com/api/op…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

6. ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed4/10

   Bitwarden documents a personal API key for CLI/automated workflows and a Public API/CLI (including `bw serve` and an official MCP server) that an agent could use, but there's no evidence of fine-grained, least-privilege scoping (e.g., read-only, per-item, or per-collection API keys) — the personal API key and CLI access appear to grant broad vault access rather than scoped permissions, and a hands-on report shows `bw list` dumping full plaintext secrets rather than a restricted subset. missing for 10: documented scoped/restricted API key types, per-agent permission grants, or evidence that MCP/CLI access can be limited to specific vault items rather than the whole vault.

   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

7. ai-native userBuild against official SDKs

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted3/10

   Twilio's docs claim official SDKs for common web languages to integrate Authy 2FA (authy-docs-1, authy-docs-13), but the same docs page also states the Authy API is closed to new customers and being deprecated in favor of Verify v2, meaning no new AI-native integration can actually be built against it. Missing for 10: evidence of an actively maintained, open-to-new-customers SDK, and any agentic/AI-specific tooling or examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [claimed-docs] “So you don't have to use the Authy API directly to integrate two-factor authentication into your app, we provide an SDK for common web langu…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed4/10

   Evidence shows Bitwarden exposes a Public API, CLI, personal API keys for automation, and an official MCP server (all of which an AI-native builder could integrate against), but there is no evidence of a dedicated, language-specific 'official SDK' (e.g., a bitwarden/sdk repo) and the OpenAPI/swagger spec probes all returned 404, suggesting no machine-readable API contract is published. missing for 10: explicit official SDK repositories/language bindings, published OpenAPI spec, independent developer corroboration of SDK usage.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://bitwarden.com/openapi.json, https://bitwarden.com/swagger.json, https://bitwarden.com/api/op…”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://github.com/bitwarden/mcp-server”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

8. ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   No evidence of any webhook subscription capability in Authy's docs or community reports; the product's API is deprecated with no new programmatic integrations mentioned. This is a fair axis for an authentication/API platform, but no support is documented.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden's evidence covers event logs via the Public API and a CLI/MCP server for vault access, but nothing describes webhook subscriptions for events—no documented webhook endpoints, registration API, or push-event mechanism.

   ⚑ flag

Agentic features

1. ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden offers CLI/API/MCP server access that agents could use, but there is no evidence of a mechanism for setting up autonomous, scheduled, or background-running automations (e.g., triggers, workflows, cron-like jobs) — it only provides interfaces for on-demand vault access. missing for 10: any documented scheduling/trigger/workflow automation feature, evidence of background/autonomous execution, or vendor claims of persistent automation setup.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed8/10

   Bitwarden ships an official MCP server (bitwarden/mcp-server) that completed a live stdio handshake, letting AI agents/assistants issue natural-language commands to manage the vault, backed by a full-featured CLI and llms.txt for AI-friendly docs. Missing for 10: no independent hands-on demonstration of a natural-language command actually retrieving/creating vault items via the MCP server, and community feedback flags CLI output risks (e.g., plaintext dumps) that complicate safe agentic use.

   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://github.com/bitwarden/mcp-server”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://bitwarden.com/llms.txt # Bitwarden > The most trusted open source password manager for passwords, passk…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Api quality

1. ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   No evidence of an interactive API reference with runnable examples for Authy; docs pack only describes SDKs and app features, and the Authy API itself is now closed/deprecated in favor of Verify, with no mention of interactive docs or runnable code samples.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [claimed-docs] “So you don't have to use the Authy API directly to integrate two-factor authentication into your app, we provide an SDK for common web langu…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden documents a Public API for org management (bitwarden-docs-8) but there is no evidence of an interactive API reference with runnable examples (e.g., Swagger/OpenAPI explorer); a direct probe for openapi.json/swagger.json endpoints returned 404 on all candidate paths (bitwarden-probe-2), indicating no such interactive reference is exposed.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://bitwarden.com/openapi.json, https://bitwarden.com/swagger.json, https://bitwarden.com/api/op…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence only mentions SDKs and API docs (Verify/Authy), with no mention of a downloadable OpenAPI/Swagger spec or other machine-readable API definition; the Authy API is also noted as deprecated with no new integrations possible.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [claimed-docs] “So you don't have to use the Authy API directly to integrate two-factor authentication into your app, we provide an SDK for common web langu…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden documents a Public API and CLI, but a probe for common OpenAPI/Swagger spec URLs (openapi.json, swagger.json, .well-known/openapi.json) all returned 404, and no evidence pack item shows a downloadable machine-readable API spec. Missing for 10: any documented OpenAPI/Swagger file, spec download link, or API reference generator output.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://bitwarden.com/openapi.json, https://bitwarden.com/swagger.json, https://bitwarden.com/api/op…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy

   weight 2 · round to Authy
   Authy~partialprobed4/10

   Twilio's docs do carry an explicit deprecation notice for the Authy API, stating it is closed to new customers and pointing to a migration guide toward Verify v2, which is a documented deprecation policy of sorts. However there is no evidence of a broader versioning scheme (e.g., v1/v2 semantics, changelogs, sunset timelines) beyond this one-time 'this API is dying' notice, and it applies to abandonment rather than an ongoing API lifecycle policy. missing for 10: evidence of a formal API versioning scheme, sunset/timeline commitments, changelog practices, and confirmation that Verify (the successor) itself has a documented deprecation policy.

   • [claimed-docs] “For more information about migration, see Migrating from Authy to Verify for SMS”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden documents a Public API and CLI/personal API key access, but there is no evidence of API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy; probes for an OpenAPI spec (bitwarden-probe-2) all returned 404s, and no docs mention version headers, breaking-change policy, or sunset timelines.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://bitwarden.com/openapi.json, https://bitwarden.com/swagger.json, https://bitwarden.com/api/op…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity6/10

   The CLI (bw list/create/edit/delete) and Public API expose scriptable, item-level access that can be chained for bulk operations, and import/export functions handle whole-vault bulk transfers of many items at once; community evidence (bw list dumping the entire vault) confirms bulk read actually works. However, there is no first-party documentation of a dedicated bulk-edit/bulk-tag/bulk-delete command or batch endpoint — bulk operations require the user to script them themselves rather than a built-in bulk API. Missing for 10: documented native bulk-update/bulk-delete commands, batch API endpoints for many items, and independent hands-on confirmation of large-scale automated edits succeeding.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Import logins and data from different password managers, other Bitwarden vaults, or encrypted exports to instantly transfer your information…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Authy's API (the Twilio Authy API) is explicitly deprecated and closed to new customers per Twilio's own docs, and community reports confirm there is no way to export/manage 2FA data programmatically outside the mobile/desktop UI—users describe hacky workarounds just to extract seeds. There is no evidence of a supported API that mirrors the app's UI capabilities (device management, backup, sync, disabling installs, etc.).

   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed6/10

   Bitwarden ships a fully-featured CLI and a Vault Management API (`bw serve`) covering item/vault CRUD, TOTP retrieval, and org management via a Public API and personal API key for automated workflows, giving strong but not fully documented parity with the UI. There's no explicit vendor claim or evidence that every UI feature (e.g., passkey autofill, browser-context auto-fill, vault health reports) is exposed via API/CLI, and a hands-on report shows the CLI's `bw list` behaves differently than expected (dumping all secrets) rather than mirroring UI workflows cleanly. missing for 10: explicit API/CLI equivalents for passkey autofill and browser-based auto-fill, API access to vault health reports, and a documented feature-parity statement.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted2/10

   Authy provides no official open-format export tool; community reports (authy-comm-3, authy-comm-4, authy-comm-10, authy-comm-18) describe deliberately obstructed migration, requiring hacky Electron debug-mode QR dumps (authy-comm-14) rather than any documented export feature, directly contradicting any implicit claim of open portability. missing for 10: any first-party documentation of a data export feature or open format, evidence of a supported 'leave the platform' workflow, and confirmation that TOTP seeds/secrets can be retrieved without workarounds.

   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “I will also never forgive Authy for removing desktop support with near immediate deprecation and no way to export off their platform. I will…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullclaimed9/10

   Bitwarden's docs explicitly support exporting full vault data (logins, notes) for backup or transfer, plus separate authenticator/TOTP export in open formats (JSON), and CLI/API access for automated bulk export. This directly satisfies the 'export all data in open formats and leave' story with strong first-party documentation. Missing for 10: no independent/hands-on confirmation of export format fidelity or completeness verification by a third party.

   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Import logins and data from different password managers, other Bitwarden vaults, or encrypted exports to instantly transfer your information…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userRead the product's source under an open license

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed6/10

   Community evidence and the MCP server repo confirm Bitwarden ships components under open licenses (e.g., bitwarden/mcp-server is GPL-3.0) and is broadly known/marketed as 'the most trusted open source password manager,' and users cite valuing its open client source. However, the same evidence documents a real controversy where Bitwarden relicensed its SDK away from a fully open license, only reversing course after backlash — a concrete counter-example to unconditional openness. missing for 10: explicit license file/repo evidence for the core vault clients, resolution details confirming all components are now uniformly open-licensed, independent audit confirming no remaining non-open components.

   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”
   • [community] “Props for them to step in the right direction, it wasn’t obvious at all for a few days what they would do (re: SDK relicensing controversy).”
   • [community] “Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing back to Free/Open License... I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in p…”
   • [community] “I’m relieved... I hope they realized that being FOSS is their moat... I’m still not sure how I feel about them now. Trust in the company has…”
   • [community] “I use BitWarden because I'd never trust a password manager with closed source clients... Needless to say I move to the next ethical e2ee pas…”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://bitwarden.com/llms.txt # Bitwarden > The most trusted open source password manager for passwords, passk…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userSelf-host the core product

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed9/10

   Bitwarden provides official, well-documented on-premise/self-hosting instructions for Linux servers, and it is open-source, aligning strongly with an AI-native user's openness needs. missing for 10: independent hands-on verification of self-hosted deployment specifically (evidence is docs-only, not community confirmation of self-hosting success).

   • [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the procedure to install and deploy Bitwarden to your own Linux server.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://bitwarden.com/llms.txt # Bitwarden > The most trusted open source password manager for passwords, passk…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Storage

1. everyday userThe app stores passkeys and signs me into websites and apps with them, not just TOTP codes

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence only shows Twilio's separate Verify API service listing 'Passkeys' as one of many verification factors developers can integrate (authy-docs-2), not that the Authy consumer app itself stores user passkeys or lets users sign into websites/apps with them. All Authy app feature docs (docs-3 through docs-12) describe only TOTP/2FA sync, backups, and device management — no passkey storage or autofill capability is mentioned, and community evidence never discusses passkey sign-in via Authy.

   • [claimed-docs] “Quickly verify users via SMS, Passkeys, Silent Network Auth, Voice, WhatsApp, TOTP, Push, Silent Device Approval, and Email.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use TouchID, PIN protection and passwords to protect access to your 2FA tokens.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Easily capture 2FA QR codes from Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox and many more.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullclaimed8/10

   Bitwarden documents storing passkeys in the vault and using the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill/sign in with them across websites and apps, going beyond TOTP-only support (bitwarden-docs-4), which aligns directly with the story's requirement of passkey-based sign-in, not just TOTP codes. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on user reports specifically confirming passkey sign-in reliability (community evidence only discusses TOTP/autofill issues, not passkeys) and detail on cross-platform (desktop app) passkey support beyond browser/mobile.

   • [claimed-docs] “Save passkeys in your Bitwarden vault and use the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill them across the apps and websites you use eve…”
   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Sync

1. power userMy passkeys sync across ecosystems — iOS, Android, Windows, Linux, browsers — instead of being locked to one platform vendor

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Authy's own docs describe syncing TOTP/2FA tokens across mobile/tablet devices (authy-docs-3, authy-docs-4), not passkeys; the only 'Passkeys' mention is in Twilio Verify API docs, which is a separate developer verification service, not evidence Authy itself stores or syncs WebAuthn passkeys across iOS/Android/Windows/Linux/browsers. No evidence shows Authy functioning as a cross-platform passkey manager.

   • [claimed-docs] “Quickly verify users via SMS, Passkeys, Silent Network Auth, Voice, WhatsApp, TOTP, Push, Silent Device Approval, and Email.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “On any device. Your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch.”
   • [claimed-docs] “It's available for iOS, Android, macOS, Windows, and Linux.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed6/10

   Bitwarden explicitly stores passkeys in the vault and lets the browser extension and mobile apps autofill them across apps and sites, which is the platform-agnostic model (unlike Apple/Google's device-locked passkey sync) [bitwarden-docs-4]. However, the docs only call out browser extension and mobile apps, not desktop apps on Windows/Linux specifically, and there's no independent hands-on confirmation of passkey sync working seamlessly across all five named platforms. Missing for 10: explicit desktop (Windows/Linux) passkey autofill documentation, and independent/community verification of cross-platform passkey sync reliability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Save passkeys in your Bitwarden vault and use the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill them across the apps and websites you use eve…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Export

1. power userExport all my TOTP secrets in an open, readable format and leave for another app whenever I choose — no lock-in

   weight 3 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted2/10

   Authy provides no official export feature for TOTP secrets, and community reports (authy-comm-3, authy-comm-4, authy-comm-10, authy-comm-18) confirm the app deliberately blocks migration/export, with users resorting to hacky workarounds like extracting keys via a deprecated Chrome extension debug mode (authy-comm-13, authy-comm-14). Docs never claim an export feature exists — only backup/sync within Authy's own ecosystem (authy-docs-5, authy-docs-3). missing for 10: any documented open/standard export format, first-party export tool, official migration path preserving secrets, and evidence contradicting the well-documented lock-in behavior.

   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “I will also never forgive Authy for removing desktop support with near immediate deprecation and no way to export off their platform. I will…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed4/10

   Bitwarden documents a general vault export (JSON/CSV) for 'logins and notes' and back-up/transfer purposes, but the evidence never explicitly confirms that TOTP secrets are included in that export or specifies an open, human-readable format for them — only import paths for other authenticators (Google Authenticator QR, LastPass JSON, 2FAS) are detailed, which is the opposite direction (lock-in mitigation on entry, not exit). Missing for 10: explicit confirmation that TOTP seeds are present in the standard export file, documentation of the exact readable TOTP export format, and any independent/hands-on verification that exported TOTP secrets can be reimported elsewhere.

   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Import

1. power userImport tokens in bulk from other authenticator apps instead of re-enrolling every account by hand

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence shows Authy lets users add individual accounts via QR code capture (authy-docs-12) but nothing indicates a bulk import feature that pulls multiple existing tokens/accounts from other authenticator apps at once. Community evidence instead focuses on Authy making it hard to export data out, which is the opposite direction from what the story asks about.

   • [claimed-docs] “Easily capture 2FA QR codes from Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox and many more.”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullclaimed8/10

   Bitwarden's official docs explicitly support bulk import of TOTP/authenticator tokens from Google Authenticator (QR), LastPass Authenticator (JSON), and 2FAS (.2fas) backups, directly enabling power users to migrate accounts without re-enrolling each one by hand. This is a first-party, documented dedicated import flow, not a workaround. missing for 10: independent hands-on confirmation of the bulk import UX working smoothly, and coverage of additional popular authenticator export formats (e.g., Authy, Microsoft Authenticator).

   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Migration

1. everyday userMoving to a new phone transfers all my tokens in one guided step

   weight 2 · round to Authy
   Authy✓fullcommunity7/10

   Authy's own docs describe encrypted cloud backup, multi-device sync, and 'add new device with SMS/voice/existing device approval' as the guided path to move 2FA tokens to a new phone, which directly matches this story (authy-docs-3,4,5,10). Community comments about difficulty exporting data are about moving to a *different app*, not the in-ecosystem new-phone transfer, so they don't contradict this specific flow. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation that the new-phone restore process itself is smooth and single-step (most community friction reports concern cross-app export, not device-to-device transfer).

   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “On any device. Your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Add new devices with SMS, voice or existing device approval.”
   • [community] “I started using Authy long ago because it supports multiple devices and isn't linked to any other account (Google/Microsoft).”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity6/10

   Bitwarden's cloud vault syncs logins, passkeys, and TOTP codes across devices automatically (docs-1, docs-2, docs-4), so logging into a new phone with the same account would pull in tokens without manual export/import — effectively delivering the outcome. However, no evidence describes a dedicated 'guided' new-device setup wizard, and one community report (bitwarden-comm-9) describes lost generated data tied to connectivity issues, raising reliability caveats for a seamless one-step transfer. Missing for 10: documented guided device-migration flow/wizard, and independent hands-on confirmation that TOTP/passkeys transfer flawlessly to a new phone.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Save passkeys in your Bitwarden vault and use the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill them across the apps and websites you use eve…”
   • [community] “I tried switching to Bitwarden and forced myself to live with it for 3 months. I gave up when it lost generated password. Apparently it is q…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   No evidence pack item mentions data residency, region selection, or self-hosting for regional compliance beyond a generic on-premise Linux install guide, which does not address choosing a storage region. Missing for 10: any documentation of region/data-residency selection (e.g., EU vs US data centers), enterprise residency options, or explicit control over where vault data is stored.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userPrevent my data from being used to train AI models

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains no documentation, policy statement, or setting from Bitwarden addressing whether vault data or user data is used to train AI models, nor any opt-out mechanism for such use. This is a fair privacy-posture question for a SaaS handling sensitive personal data, but nothing in the pack confirms or denies a stance, so it cannot be credited as delivered.

   ⚑ flag

3. ai-native userControl data retention and deletion

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   No documentation shows Authy giving users control over data retention/export/deletion; instead multiple independent reports describe Twilio deliberately blocking data export ('no export option', 'extremely difficult to export your data') and forcing convoluted workarounds to extract keys, the opposite of user-controlled retention/deletion.

   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “I will also never forgive Authy for removing desktop support with near immediate deprecation and no way to export off their platform. I will…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity3/10

   Bitwarden docs show users can export their vault data (for backup or account transfer) and community evidence indicates an account-deletion path exists (export → delete account → recreate), but there is no dedicated, first-party documentation on data retention policies, granular deletion controls, or how these apply to AI/agent access (e.g., MCP server or CLI-served vault data). Missing for 10: explicit retention policy documentation, dedicated account/vault deletion docs, and clarity on data lifecycle when accessed via CLI/MCP for AI agents.

   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault”
   • [community] “BitWarden has lost the trust. There was a blocker bug on iOS, they went radio silent on follow-ups, and their fix suggestion was 'export dat…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userOpt out of telemetry and usage tracking

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains no documentation, settings, or community reports describing a telemetry/usage-tracking opt-out control in Bitwarden clients, CLI, or self-hosted server. While the axis is fair to ask of any privacy-focused product, nothing here confirms such a toggle exists or how it works.

   ⚑ flag

App lock

1. everyday userThe app itself locks behind biometrics or a PIN, so a borrowed phone doesn't expose my codes

   weight 2 · round to Authy
   Authy✓fullcommunity8/10

   Twilio's official docs claim TouchID, PIN, and password protection guarding access to 2FA tokens, and a community user independently corroborates using Face ID to lock the entire app on their phone. This directly matches the story of biometric/PIN app-lock preventing exposure on a borrowed phone. Missing for 10: more independent hands-on verification of PIN-specific lock behavior and no detail on lockout/failure edge cases.

   • [claimed-docs] “Use TouchID, PIN protection and passwords to protect access to your 2FA tokens.”
   • [community] “I use Authy with Face ID protecting the entire app on my phone... they'd still need the 2FA codes from my phone [even if password manager co…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity3/10

   No official documentation in the evidence pack describes a PIN/biometric app-lock feature; the only signal is an indirect community comment implying fingerprint unlock already exists on some platforms but is missing on Linux, which weakly corroborates the capability without detailing scope or coverage. Missing for 10: first-party docs on biometric/PIN unlock, mobile-specific confirmation, and independent hands-on validation of the lock behavior.

   • [community] “Yeah it's nice and all but I wish they brought fingerprint auth to Linux already.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Audits

1. security engineerThe vendor publishes independent security audits of the app and its sync protocol

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains no vendor claim of independent third-party security audits of the app or its sync protocol; documentation focuses on feature descriptions (SDKs, sync, backup) with no audit reports or security whitepapers cited. Community evidence discusses a data breach and a slow-to-fix vulnerability, but these do not substitute for published audit evidence and there's no vendor claim to dispute.

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   No evidence pack items reference independent third-party security audits, penetration tests, or cryptographic/protocol reviews of Bitwarden's app or sync protocol; the pack only covers docs on features (TOTP, autofill, CLI, import/export) and community sentiment/complaints unrelated to audits. Missing for 10: published audit reports (e.g., Cure53), audit scope/dates, sync protocol review findings, remediation disclosures.

   ⚑ flag

Monitoring

1. power userThe app warns me when a service I use is breached or a stored credential is weak, reused, or exposed

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   No evidence Authy monitors for breached services, weak/reused/exposed credentials, or provides any security-posture alerts; evidence only covers 2FA sync, backup, device management, and separate breach news about Authy itself (not a feature it offers users).

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed5/10

   Bitwarden's Vault Health Reports (docs-11/17) explicitly check for reused and weak passwords locally on the client, covering part of the story, but no evidence in the pack documents breach monitoring (e.g., known data-breach alerts) or an 'exposed passwords' check against breach databases. Missing for 10: evidence of breach/exposure alerts for compromised services, and any exposed-credential detection feature.

   • [claimed-docs] “Vault health reports can help you evaluate the security of your Bitwarden individual or organization vault... Reports... are run locally on …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Vault health reports can help you evaluate the security of your Bitwarden individual or organization vault. Reports, such as the Reused Pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Push

1. it adminPush-based sign-in includes phishing defenses — number matching, location context, and admin-enforced MFA policies

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence only shows generic Push and Silent Device Approval support (authy-docs-2, authy-docs-15) with no mention of number matching, location context, or admin-enforced MFA policy controls; the Authy API itself is also noted as deprecated for new integrations (authy-probe-rt-1). Missing for 10: any documentation of number matching, location-based risk signals, or admin policy enforcement for push sign-in.

   • [claimed-docs] “Quickly verify users via SMS, Passkeys, Silent Network Auth, Voice, WhatsApp, TOTP, Push, Silent Device Approval, and Email.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Push and Silent Device Approval (iOS, Android, Web)”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

Server

1. it adminSelf-host the sync server on my own infrastructure and keep every secret inside my perimeter

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullclaimed8/10

   Bitwarden provides official documentation for installing and deploying the self-hosted server on a Linux server, keeping vault data on the admin's own infrastructure — the core of this story. Missing for 10: independent hands-on verification of a real-world self-hosted deployment and details on ongoing maintenance/upgrade complexity for self-hosted instances.

   • [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the procedure to install and deploy Bitwarden to your own Linux server.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Source

1. security engineerThe client apps are open source, so the code handling my seeds can be inspected and community-reviewed

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   There is no evidence Authy's client apps are open source; evidence instead shows closed, proprietary apps with deliberately obstructed export/migration paths and hacky reverse-engineering required to extract seeds. This directly contradicts the premise of community-reviewable open-source code handling seeds.

   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed6/10

   Bitwarden markets itself as 'the most trusted open source password manager' and community members explicitly cite open-source clients as the reason they trust it with secrets (bitwarden-probe-1, bitwarden-comm-15). However, the evidence also documents a real controversy where SDK code (used by clients) was briefly relicensed away from a fully open license before being reverted after community pressure, which shows scrutiny worked but also that openness has not always been airtight (bitwarden-comm-1, bitwarden-comm-3, bitwarden-comm-4). Missing for 10: direct links to client-app GitHub repos, explicit confirmation that seed/TOTP-handling code specifically is open and audited, and independent third-party code audits corroborating the open-source claim.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://bitwarden.com/llms.txt # Bitwarden > The most trusted open source password manager for passwords, passk…”
   • [community] “I use BitWarden because I'd never trust a password manager with closed source clients... Needless to say I move to the next ethical e2ee pas…”
   • [community] “Props for them to step in the right direction, it wasn’t obvious at all for a few days what they would do (re: SDK relicensing controversy).”
   • [community] “Thank you to Bitwarden for relicensing back to Free/Open License... I no longer recommend Bitwarden for normal people because the built-in p…”
   • [community] “I’m relieved... I hope they realized that being FOSS is their moat... I’m still not sure how I feel about them now. Trust in the company has…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Automation

1. ai-native userAn agent can fetch a current TOTP code programmatically — via CLI or API — to complete a 2FA login inside an automated workflow

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Authy is a consumer authenticator app; there is no documented CLI/API for a user or agent to programmatically fetch their own current TOTP code, and Twilio's docs confirm the Authy API is deprecated and closed to new customers with no successor for this use case. Community evidence further shows Authy intentionally blocks exporting secrets/codes, requiring hacky workarounds (deprecated Chrome extension, debug-mode Electron hacks) rather than any supported programmatic access.

   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed8/10

   Bitwarden's integrated authenticator generates TOTP codes (bitwarden-docs-1) and the CLI is documented as a full vault-management tool suitable for automated workflows via personal API key (bitwarden-docs-7, bitwarden-docs-9); runtime probes confirm 'bw serve' exposes a local REST Vault Management API and an official MCP server completes a full handshake, both surfaces an agent could use to fetch TOTP codes programmatically (bitwarden-probe-rt-1, bitwarden-probe-rt-2). Hands-on community evidence independently corroborates that 'bw list' actually returns current TOTP codes in plaintext, confirming the CLI does return live TOTP data (bitwarden-comm-13). Missing for 10: explicit documentation naming a dedicated 'get totp' command/API endpoint and a clean (non-complaint) hands-on workflow example.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”
   • [community] “I had a really bad experience with the bitwarden cli. I ran 'bw list', assuming it would list names, but it listed everything including pass…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExpose the vault through a local programmatic endpoint an agent can query for codes and secrets without screen-scraping the app

   weight 1 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   No evidence Authy offers any local programmatic endpoint for agents to query codes/secrets; its API is closed to new customers and deprecated, and community reports describe the vault as deliberately hard to export via any means other than hacky manual extraction.

   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed8/10

   Bitwarden's CLI supports a documented `bw serve` mode exposing the vault as a local RESTful API, and Bitwarden ships an official MCP server (bitwarden/mcp-server) that completed a live stdio handshake, both giving agents programmatic access to vault items and TOTP codes without screen-scraping. missing for 10: no independent hands-on validation of `bw serve` specifically for TOTP retrieval by an agent, and no broader third-party corroboration beyond the vendor-run probes.

   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://github.com/bitwarden/mcp-server”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Browser

1. everyday userA browser extension autofills my TOTP codes and passkeys during login instead of making me retype them

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence pack shows no current Authy browser extension for autofilling TOTP or passkeys; the only extension mentioned is a deprecated Chrome extension used via hacky workarounds to extract keys, not autofill. Authy's own product is a mobile/desktop authenticator app, and passkey support referenced is for Twilio Verify (a separate API product), not the Authy app/extension.

   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Quickly verify users via SMS, Passkeys, Silent Network Auth, Voice, WhatsApp, TOTP, Push, Silent Device Approval, and Email.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullcommunity8/10

   Docs confirm browser extension autofills matching credentials on login pages (docs-12), autofills stored passkeys across apps/websites (docs-4), and generates/syncs TOTP codes (docs-1, docs-2) which are surfaced during autofill in the extension. One community mention notes TOTP setup friction, but no concrete evidence contradicts the core autofill-of-TOTP/passkeys capability. Missing for 10: independent hands-on confirmation specifically that TOTP codes (not just passwords/passkeys) are auto-filled into login forms without manual copy-paste.

   • [claimed-docs] “When you visit a website, the browser extension recognizes it and enters matching credentials from your vault into the login fields.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Save passkeys in your Bitwarden vault and use the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill them across the apps and websites you use eve…”
   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [community] “I always enjoyed the value that Bitwarden provides: free to use, password generator, and a vault to keep other texts. But somehow I never go…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Desktop

1. power userA first-class desktop app gives me codes and vault access on my computer, not just on mobile

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted4/10

   Twilio's docs list Authy as available on macOS, Windows, and Linux, suggesting first-class desktop apps, but hands-on community reports concretely contradict this, stating Authy is 'EOL'ing desktop apps' with 'near immediate deprecation' and no export path, leaving the desktop surface unreliable for power users. Missing for 10: no evidence of continued desktop app support with vault/code access, no independent confirmation the desktop client remains functional or maintained post-EOL announcement.

   • [claimed-docs] “It's available for iOS, Android, macOS, Windows, and Linux.”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “I will also never forgive Authy for removing desktop support with near immediate deprecation and no way to export off their platform. I will…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialprobed5/10

   Evidence confirms TOTP codes sync across 'Bitwarden apps' and vault access is available via browser extension and CLI on a computer, implying desktop-class access, but no citation explicitly documents a native desktop application (GUI) separate from the browser extension/CLI. Missing for 10: explicit desktop app documentation, screenshots/feature parity claims, and independent confirmation that a first-class desktop GUI (not just extension/CLI) exists and works well.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “When you visit a website, the browser extension recognizes it and enters matching credentials from your vault into the login fields.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Watch

1. everyday userRead my codes from my smartwatch without pulling out my phone

   weight 1 · round to Authy
   Authy~partialprobed5/10

   Authy's own marketing page explicitly claims support on 'your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch,' which directly matches the smartwatch-reading story, but this is a single first-party claim with no independent or hands-on confirmation of watch functionality (e.g., no community mention of using the watch app), and the API deprecation notice signals the product line is winding down. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on verification of the Apple Watch experience, detail on Wear OS or other smartwatch support, and confirmation the feature is still maintained post-deprecation.

   • [claimed-docs] “On any device. Your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers TOTP generation, syncing, browser extension, CLI, and API features, but contains no mention of a smartwatch app, Wear OS/watchOS companion, or any glanceable code display for wearables. This is a fair capability question for a password manager with a built-in authenticator, but no evidence shows it is delivered.

   ⚑ flag

Backup

1. security engineerBackups are end-to-end encrypted with a key the vendor never holds, and the encryption design is documented

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Authy~partialcommunity4/10

   Authy's marketing page states backups are encrypted and 'only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know' (authy-docs-5), implying a vendor-can't-decrypt design, but there is no technical documentation of the encryption algorithm, key derivation, or threat model, and no independent audit confirming the vendor truly never holds the key. Community reports focus on account-takeover via device-add (authy-comm-15) and painful data export (authy-comm-13/14), not on breaking the underlying backup encryption, so this doesn't rise to a concrete dispute of the encryption claim itself. Missing for 10: a detailed whitepaper/spec of the E2E encryption scheme, key management details, and independent security audit or crypto review corroborating the zero-knowledge claim.

   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “The Twilio exploit allowed the hackers to add a new device to existing Authy accounts. This allowed them to sync the keys between devices wi…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs confirm Bitwarden supports vault export/import and mention an 'encrypted exports' option (bitwarden-docs-5, bitwarden-docs-6, bitwarden-docs-16), implying some backups can be encrypted, but no evidence pack item documents the underlying encryption design, key derivation, or explicitly states the vendor cannot access backup contents. missing for 10: a linked security whitepaper or architecture doc describing zero-knowledge key management for exports, explicit vendor-can't-decrypt-backups statement, and independent verification of the encrypted export format.

   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Import logins and data from different password managers, other Bitwarden vaults, or encrypted exports to instantly transfer your information…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Multi device

1. everyday userMy tokens are available on my phone, tablet, and computer at the same time, kept in sync automatically

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted4/10

   Docs and community confirm sync across phone/tablet (and even Apple Watch) works well and is a headline feature (authy-docs-3, authy-docs-4, authy-docs-16, authy-comm-1), but the 'computer' part of the story is directly contradicted: community reports Authy EOL'd its desktop apps, breaking the phone/tablet/computer parity the docs still describe (authy-comm-10, authy-comm-18). Missing for 10: confirmation that desktop/computer sync still functions today, and resolution of the desktop deprecation vs docs claim.

   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “On any device. Your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch.”
   • [claimed-docs] “It's available for iOS, Android, macOS, Windows, and Linux.”
   • [community] “I started using Authy long ago because it supports multiple devices and isn't linked to any other account (Google/Microsoft).”
   • [community] “They intentionally make it really hard to migrate your data off their app under the premise of 'security'. Now they are EOL'ing desktop apps…”
   • [community] “I will also never forgive Authy for removing desktop support with near immediate deprecation and no way to export off their platform. I will…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden!disputedcontradicted6/10

   Bitwarden's docs describe cloud-based vault sync (TOTP codes staying synchronized across apps, passkeys usable across browser extension and mobile apps, auto-fill working consistently) which underlies cross-device availability of stored items (bitwarden-docs-2, bitwarden-docs-4, bitwarden-docs-12). However, a hands-on community report describes losing a generated password due to sync failures on bad connections, calling it 'quite common' (bitwarden-comm-9), directly contradicting the claim of seamless automatic sync. missing for 10: independent verification of reliable real-time sync across phone/tablet/computer simultaneously, and resolution/acknowledgment of the reported data-loss-on-sync issue.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Save passkeys in your Bitwarden vault and use the browser extension or mobile apps to autofill them across the apps and websites you use eve…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When you visit a website, the browser extension recognizes it and enters matching credentials from your vault into the login fields.”
   • [community] “I tried switching to Bitwarden and forced myself to live with it for 3 months. I gave up when it lost generated password. Apparently it is q…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Recovery

1. everyday userLosing my phone doesn't lose my accounts — a documented recovery path restores my tokens on a new device

   weight 3 · round to Authy
   Authy✓fullcommunity7/10

   Authy's official docs describe an encrypted backup feature that restores 2FA tokens to a new device using a user-known password, plus multi-device sync and device management (authy-docs-3,4,5,8,10), and a community user confirms this recovery path works in practice after phone loss/SIM replacement (authy-comm-19). Some community friction exists around exporting data to competing apps, but that's a separate migration-away concern, not evidence the phone-loss recovery path itself fails. Missing for 10: a detailed first-party step-by-step restore walkthrough, and broader independent corroboration beyond a single community anecdote.

   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “On any device. Your phone, tablet, even your Apple Watch.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”
   • [claimed-docs] “View information, rename, and remove lost/stolen devices.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Add new devices with SMS, voice or existing device approval.”
   • [community] “I've been using Authy as a backup for 1Password's 2FA since in a worst-case scenario I can get a replacement SIM card and get back into my 1…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity6/10

   Bitwarden's docs show that TOTP codes are synced across the Bitwarden apps (docs-2) and that vault data (including logins) can be exported/imported to restore to a new install (docs-5, docs-6), which together give a de facto path to recover accounts/tokens on a new device after losing a phone. However there is no explicit 'lost my phone' recovery guide, and community reports mention TOTP/sync reliability problems (bitwarden-comm-12, bitwarden-comm-9) that add real-world caveats. Missing for 10: a dedicated 'device loss/account recovery' doc, evidence of automatic cloud vault sync restoring a fresh install without manual export/import, and confirmation that community-reported sync/TOTP glitches don't block this flow.

   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Export your vault data, including logins and notes, to back up important information or transfer to a new Bitwarden vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Import logins and data from different password managers, other Bitwarden vaults, or encrypted exports to instantly transfer your information…”
   • [community] “I always enjoyed the value that Bitwarden provides: free to use, password generator, and a vault to keep other texts. But somehow I never go…”
   • [community] “I tried switching to Bitwarden and forced myself to live with it for 3 months. I gave up when it lost generated password. Apparently it is q…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Automation

1. ai-native userAn agent can create and update vault entries — seeding new TOTP secrets, storing credentials — through documented programmatic surfaces

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy!disputedcontradicted2/10

   Docs mention an SDK for 'the Authy API' to integrate 2FA, but Twilio's own docs page (probe) states the Authy API is closed to new customers and being deprecated with no new integrations, and multiple community reports confirm there is no supported way to programmatically seed, export, or update vault entries — users describe extreme difficulty or hacky workarounds to even extract secrets. This directly contradicts any claim of a documented programmatic surface for agent-driven vault creation/updates. Missing for 10: any current API/SDK for creating or updating TOTP vault entries, official export/import endpoints, and first-party agent integration examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “we provide an SDK for common web languages. If your language is supported, it's the fastest way to get started.”
   • [claimed-docs] “So you don't have to use the Authy API directly to integrate two-factor authentication into your app, we provide an SDK for common web langu…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden✓fullprobed7/10

   Bitwarden documents multiple programmatic surfaces for vault management — the fully-featured CLI (which supports create/edit item operations and a `bw serve` mode exposing a local REST API for TOTP/items), a personal API key explicitly recommended for 'automated workflows' and 'external applications,' and an official first-party MCP server that completed a live stdio handshake, giving agents a documented path to create and update vault entries including TOTP secrets. Missing for 10: an explicit doc/code example showing the exact CLI/API call syntax for adding a TOTP field to a new item, and independent (non-vendor) confirmation that an agent successfully created/updated entries end-to-end via these surfaces.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden command-line interface (CLI) is a powerful, fully-featured tool for accessing and managing your vault.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Using the personal API key for CLI authentication is suitable for automated workflows, for providing access to an external appli”
   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://bitwarden.com/help/cli/”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): the official bw CLI installs keylessly from npm (@bitwarden/cli, registry latest 2026.8.0) and prints i…”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Bitwarden's OFFICIAL MCP server completed a FULL keyless stdio initialize handshake — `npx -y @bitwarde…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Policy

1. it adminEnforce org-wide policies — require app lock, restrict export, mandate strong master credentials — across every member's app

   weight 1 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Authy's evidence pack shows only consumer-facing features (per-device PIN/TouchID lock, backup password, device management) with no mention of any organization/admin console, centralized policy enforcement, or IT-admin controls across a team of users. The product is also being deprecated in favor of Verify, with no admin management surface described anywhere.

   • [claimed-docs] “Use TouchID, PIN protection and passwords to protect access to your 2FA tokens.”
   • [claimed-docs] “View information, rename, and remove lost/stolen devices.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Disable future Authy app installations for improved security.”
   • [probe] “PROBE runtime (recorded 2026-09-15): Twilio's own docs page carries the deprecation notice verbatim — 'The Authy API is now closed to new cu…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed3/10

   The evidence only shows that Bitwarden's Public API lets organizations manage 'members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies,' implying policy management exists, but there is no documentation shown for specific policies like app-lock enforcement, export restriction, or master-password strength requirements. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of individual policy types (master password strength, disable personal vault export, require app lock/timeout), admin console UI screenshots or workflow, and any hands-on confirmation that these policies are enforced across all members' apps.

   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Sharing

1. it adminMy team can share TOTP-protected logins through shared vaults or collections with per-member access control

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Authy is a personal authenticator app with no evidence of shared vaults, collections, or per-member access control for team/admin management; evidence only covers individual multi-device sync and backup features. Community evidence even highlights difficulty exporting/sharing data at all, reinforcing the lack of team-sharing capability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Sync 2FA across mobile and tablet.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use our backup feature incase you lose your phone. We encrypt your data, and only decrypt on the devices using a password only you know.”
   • [community] “Authy makes it hard to migrate away. Anyone know how to get the seed of the 2FA codes? Is there really no export option?”
   • [community] “I just migrated off of Authy last week... Never liked it but they make it extremely difficult to export your data. Twilio really doesn't wan…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity6/10

   Bitwarden's docs confirm built-in TOTP generation/sync (bitwarden-docs-1, bitwarden-docs-2) and its Public API supports managing organization members, collections, and groups (bitwarden-docs-8), and a real-world team user cites 'safer account sharing, including 2FA' as a killer feature (bitwarden-comm-8). However, the evidence pack lacks explicit documentation tying TOTP fields to collection-level per-member permissions/access control, so the granular sharing mechanics aren't directly evidenced. Missing for 10: dedicated docs on collection permission levels (view/edit/manage) applied to TOTP-containing items, and independent confirmation of this exact workflow.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “The Bitwarden Public API provides organizations a suite of tools for managing members, collections, groups, event logs, and policies.”
   • [community] “We use BitWarden at work, paying $3600/year. Their product is great for teams... The killer feature for me has been safer account sharing, i…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Enrollment

1. everyday userScan a QR code and immediately start generating TOTP codes for a new account

   weight 3 · round to Authy
   Authy✓fullcommunity7/10

   Authy's own product page states it can capture 2FA QR codes from major providers and lists TOTP as a supported authentication method, directly matching the scan-and-generate story, and community comments confirm ongoing everyday use of the app for this purpose. Missing for 10: a first-person hands-on account of the exact scan-to-code flow and more detailed onboarding documentation beyond the marketing feature list.

   • [claimed-docs] “Easily capture 2FA QR codes from Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox and many more.”
   • [claimed-docs] “TOTP (Authenticator Apps)”
   • [community] “I started using Authy long ago because it supports multiple devices and isn't linked to any other account (Google/Microsoft).”
   • [community] “I've been using Authy as a backup for 1Password's 2FA since in a worst-case scenario I can get a replacement SIM card and get back into my 1…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialcommunity6/10

   Docs confirm Bitwarden's integrated authenticator automatically generates rotating TOTP codes once a key/QR is added to a login item (bitwarden-docs-1, bitwarden-docs-13), which covers the core capability, but the pack lacks explicit documentation of the actual camera-scan-QR flow for a brand-new account (only QR-based *import* from another authenticator app is documented, bitwarden-docs-3/14). One community report also describes difficulty getting TOTP working at all (bitwarden-comm-12), though it's anecdotal and not a concrete reproducible failure. missing for 10: explicit doc/screenshot of scanning a QR to add a brand-new TOTP secret (not import), and independent hands-on confirmation that codes generate immediately after scan.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Let's start your Bitwarden browser extension journey by adding a new login item to your vault”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”
   • [community] “I always enjoyed the value that Bitwarden provides: free to use, password generator, and a vault to keep other texts. But somehow I never go…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Offline

1. power userCodes generate fully offline — no network, no vendor account required just to see my TOTP codes

   weight 2 · round to Authy
   Authy!disputedcontradicted4/10

   Authy's own docs claim codes can be viewed without internet ('access secured websites without internet access on your phone'), but the product fundamentally requires creating a Twilio/Authy account tied to a phone number before any TOTP codes can be generated or viewed, and codes are further gated behind an app password — directly contradicting the 'no vendor account required' part of the story. Community evidence confirms this account-centric architecture (phone-number-as-username, multi-device sync tied to account, extraction of underlying seeds required hacky workarounds via a deprecated debug mode rather than a supported offline export).

   • [claimed-docs] “You can still access secured websites without internet access on your phone.”
   • [community] “I started using Authy long ago because it supports multiple devices and isn't linked to any other account (Google/Microsoft).”
   • [community] “This doesn't scare me because in Authy you also set a password which without you cannot access the codes. The phone number here just acts as…”
   • [community] “After a lot of trouble, I was able to extract my private keys from Authy by installing their deprecated Chrome extension and using some hack…”
   • [community] “Note how insane the Authy export instructions are: 'Paste in a bunch of code to an Electron app running Authy in debug mode to dump the toke…”
   • [community] “services with Authy-integrated MFA (like Twitch) are 'managed' by Authy so it can regenerate the secret on the fly; your previously extracte…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   Bitwarden's TOTP generation is tightly coupled to the vault: codes are stored and computed inside a Bitwarden vault item, which requires a Bitwarden account/vault (docs-1, docs-2) and typically syncs across the vendor's cloud infrastructure. No evidence describes a standalone, account-free offline TOTP mode; self-hosting (docs-10) still requires an account/server setup, not a vendor-free path. missing for 10: evidence of a no-account, no-vendor-server offline TOTP mode; confirmation that code generation works without ever creating/authenticating a Bitwarden account.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “This article will walk you through the procedure to install and deploy Bitwarden to your own Linux server.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Organization

1. power userKeep dozens of tokens organized — search, folders or groups, and service icons — so the right code is always two taps away

   weight 2 · round to Bitwarden
   Authy—none0/10

   Evidence shows only basic token/QR capture (service icons implied) with no mention of search or folder/group organization; a community user explicitly complains 'can't we please have alphabetization?' indicating the app lacks even simple sorting, let alone search/folders for power users managing dozens of tokens.

   • [claimed-docs] “Easily capture 2FA QR codes from Facebook, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox and many more.”
   • [community] “My guess is that most of the people who worked on Authy have fallen by the wayside after the Twilio acquisition. It's annoying every time I …”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Bitwarden~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs confirm Bitwarden generates and syncs TOTP codes across devices and lets users import/export authenticator data (bitwarden-docs-1, bitwarden-docs-2, bitwarden-docs-3), which supports storing many tokens, but nothing in the evidence pack speaks to search, folders/groups, or service icons specifically for TOTP entries — organization is only implied through the general vault (login) item structure. missing for 10: explicit documentation of folder/collection organization for TOTP items, search functionality across TOTP entries, and service icon display for stored codes.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”
   • [claimed-docs] “Connect Authenticator with Password Manager to sync your verification codes. Once activated, the Bitwarden apps stay synchronized with any c…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Google Authenticator (QR code): Import from Google Authenticator using a QR code... LastPass (JSON): Import a LastPass Authenticator account…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Variants

1. power userNon-standard tokens work too — Steam Guard, HOTP counters, custom periods and digit lengths

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Authy—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack mentions Steam Guard support, HOTP counter-based tokens, or custom period/digit configurations; documentation only references standard TOTP and QR-code capture from mainstream services. Absence of evidence for this applicable power-user axis yields 'none'.

   ⚑ flag

   Bitwarden—none0/10

   The evidence only describes Bitwarden's standard TOTP support (six-digit SHA-1 codes rotating every 30 seconds) with no mention of Steam Guard tokens, HOTP counters, or custom periods/digit lengths anywhere in the docs, community, or probe items.

   • [claimed-docs] “it automatically produces the time-based one-time passwords (TOTPs), six-digit codes using SHA-1 that rotate every 30 seconds”

   proof ↗⚑ flag