Vibecode RoboForm
track this build5 steps, step by step0%A consolation build is possible, but the paid product's decisive value sits outside a solo rebuild. For RoboForm, build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set. The hard boundary is decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support, plus security assurance, infrastructure, and trust.
You are building a lean indie version of RoboForm. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== README.md ===== # RoboForm indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core RoboForm workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support - independent security audits - global relay infrastructure - breach monitoring data - account recovery and support If those capabilities are essential, use Vaultwarden instead of pretending the gap is solved. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs". ===== BUILD_PLAN.md ===== # Build plan ## Original build brief Build a closest honest personal substitute for RoboForm in an empty repository. Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature. Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt. Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives. Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups. Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation. Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure. Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network. Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal. Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used. ## Required capabilities - desktop OS - secure backup location - modern cryptographic libraries - careful review before real-world use ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden. ===== .env.example ===== # Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
You are building a lean indie version of RoboForm. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== README.md ===== # RoboForm indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core RoboForm workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support - independent security audits - global relay infrastructure - breach monitoring data - account recovery and support If those capabilities are essential, use Vaultwarden instead of pretending the gap is solved. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs". ===== BUILD_PLAN.md ===== # Build plan ## Original build brief Build a closest honest personal substitute for RoboForm in an empty repository. Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature. Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt. Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives. Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups. Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation. Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure. Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network. Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal. Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used. ## Required capabilities - desktop OS - secure backup location - modern cryptographic libraries - careful review before real-world use ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden. ===== .env.example ===== # Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
You are building a production product version of RoboForm. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== PRODUCT.md ===== # RoboForm product brief ## Problem A consolation build is possible, but the paid product's decisive value sits outside a solo rebuild. For RoboForm, build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set. The hard boundary is decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support, plus security assurance, infrastructure, and trust. ## Product outcome Build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. ## Target user A serious builder who needs a maintainable product foundation rather than a one-off demo. ## Required capabilities - desktop OS - secure backup location - modern cryptographic libraries - careful review before real-world use ## Explicit non-goals for v1 - decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support - independent security audits - global relay infrastructure - breach monitoring data - account recovery and support ## Success criteria - The primary workflow is measurable end to end. - Setup is reproducible in a clean environment. - Failure, recovery, and support paths are documented. - Product claims match what the implementation actually guarantees. ===== ARCHITECTURE.md ===== # Architecture ## Starting brief Build a closest honest personal substitute for RoboForm in an empty repository. Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature. Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt. Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives. Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups. Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation. Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure. Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network. Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal. Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used. ## Boundaries Separate the product into replaceable modules for interface, application logic, persistence, external integrations, and operational concerns. Keep domain logic independent from delivery frameworks and vendors. ## Production baseline - Configuration: validated at startup with safe local defaults where possible. - Security: least privilege, input validation, secret redaction, rate limits on abuse-prone paths, and no invented security primitives. - Data: explicit schema and migrations, transactional writes where integrity matters, backup and restore instructions. - Integrations: adapters around third-party providers, idempotent webhook or job processing, bounded retries, and timeouts. - Observability: structured logs with request or operation IDs, an error-tracking hook, and health/readiness checks where a server exists. - Quality: unit tests for domain rules, integration tests at module boundaries, and one end-to-end critical-path test. ## Decision records For each major dependency, document why it was chosen, its failure mode, and how it can be replaced. Do not introduce infrastructure until a requirement justifies it. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Read `PRODUCT.md` and `ARCHITECTURE.md` before changing code. - Implement milestone by milestone; keep each change reviewable and leave the application runnable. - Treat authentication, payments, encryption, imports, webhooks, and destructive actions as high-risk boundaries when present. - Never invent cryptography or silently weaken a requirement to make a test pass. - Use provider interfaces for external services and deterministic fakes in tests. - Add migrations and rollback or recovery notes for persistent data changes. - Log useful operational context without credentials, tokens, passwords, or personal data. - Update documentation and run all checks before completing a milestone. ===== MILESTONES.md ===== # Delivery milestones ## M0 — Decisions and scaffold - Confirm the runtime, persistence model, threat boundaries, and deployment target. - Create a reproducible local environment and continuous checks. ## M1 — Core workflow - Implement the smallest end-to-end product path with validation and tests. - Keep integrations behind interfaces. ## M2 — Trust layer - Add secure failure behavior, recovery paths, audit-relevant events, and data safeguards. - Test abuse cases and destructive operations. ## M3 — Operability - Add structured logs, error reporting hooks, health signals, backup/restore documentation, and deployment configuration. ## M4 — Release gate - Run a clean-install test, critical-path end-to-end test, dependency review, and documented rollback exercise. - Compare the shipped behavior with `PRODUCT.md` and publish remaining limitations. ===== OPERATIONS.md ===== # Operations ## Before release - Validate configuration and secrets at startup. - Define backup, restore, and rollback procedures and test them. - Document logs, error tracking, health signals, and alert ownership. - Set dependency update and vulnerability review expectations. ## Incident checklist 1. Contain the issue without destroying evidence or user data. 2. Record the timeline and affected scope. 3. Rotate exposed secrets and revoke compromised sessions or credentials. 4. Restore from a verified source when needed. 5. Document the root cause, remediation, and regression test. ## Launch constraint Do not market omitted RoboForm capabilities as implemented. The v1 non-goals in `PRODUCT.md` remain user-visible limitations until they are deliberately delivered.
# RoboForm indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core RoboForm workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support - independent security audits - global relay infrastructure - breach monitoring data - account recovery and support If those capabilities are essential, use Vaultwarden instead of pretending the gap is solved.
# Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs".
# Build plan ## Original build brief Build a closest honest personal substitute for RoboForm in an empty repository. Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature. Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt. Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives. Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups. Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation. Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure. Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network. Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal. Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used. ## Required capabilities - desktop OS - secure backup location - modern cryptographic libraries - careful review before real-world use ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden.
# Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
# RoboForm product brief ## Problem A consolation build is possible, but the paid product's decisive value sits outside a solo rebuild. For RoboForm, build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set. The hard boundary is decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support, plus security assurance, infrastructure, and trust. ## Product outcome Build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. ## Target user A serious builder who needs a maintainable product foundation rather than a one-off demo. ## Required capabilities - desktop OS - secure backup location - modern cryptographic libraries - careful review before real-world use ## Explicit non-goals for v1 - decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support - independent security audits - global relay infrastructure - breach monitoring data - account recovery and support ## Success criteria - The primary workflow is measurable end to end. - Setup is reproducible in a clean environment. - Failure, recovery, and support paths are documented. - Product claims match what the implementation actually guarantees.
# Architecture ## Starting brief Build a closest honest personal substitute for RoboForm in an empty repository. Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks. The core loop is: build a local password vault and form filler with a deliberately narrow field set, strong encryption, explicit threat-model documentation, and no claim of replacing an audited service. Make the first run work locally with one documented command. Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward. Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials. Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature. Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt. Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives. Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups. Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation. Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit. Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states. Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs. Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path. Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps. Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane. Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure. Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network. Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal. Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support. Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used. ## Boundaries Separate the product into replaceable modules for interface, application logic, persistence, external integrations, and operational concerns. Keep domain logic independent from delivery frameworks and vendors. ## Production baseline - Configuration: validated at startup with safe local defaults where possible. - Security: least privilege, input validation, secret redaction, rate limits on abuse-prone paths, and no invented security primitives. - Data: explicit schema and migrations, transactional writes where integrity matters, backup and restore instructions. - Integrations: adapters around third-party providers, idempotent webhook or job processing, bounded retries, and timeouts. - Observability: structured logs with request or operation IDs, an error-tracking hook, and health/readiness checks where a server exists. - Quality: unit tests for domain rules, integration tests at module boundaries, and one end-to-end critical-path test. ## Decision records For each major dependency, document why it was chosen, its failure mode, and how it can be replaced. Do not introduce infrastructure until a requirement justifies it.
# Agent instructions - Read `PRODUCT.md` and `ARCHITECTURE.md` before changing code. - Implement milestone by milestone; keep each change reviewable and leave the application runnable. - Treat authentication, payments, encryption, imports, webhooks, and destructive actions as high-risk boundaries when present. - Never invent cryptography or silently weaken a requirement to make a test pass. - Use provider interfaces for external services and deterministic fakes in tests. - Add migrations and rollback or recovery notes for persistent data changes. - Log useful operational context without credentials, tokens, passwords, or personal data. - Update documentation and run all checks before completing a milestone.
# Delivery milestones ## M0 — Decisions and scaffold - Confirm the runtime, persistence model, threat boundaries, and deployment target. - Create a reproducible local environment and continuous checks. ## M1 — Core workflow - Implement the smallest end-to-end product path with validation and tests. - Keep integrations behind interfaces. ## M2 — Trust layer - Add secure failure behavior, recovery paths, audit-relevant events, and data safeguards. - Test abuse cases and destructive operations. ## M3 — Operability - Add structured logs, error reporting hooks, health signals, backup/restore documentation, and deployment configuration. ## M4 — Release gate - Run a clean-install test, critical-path end-to-end test, dependency review, and documented rollback exercise. - Compare the shipped behavior with `PRODUCT.md` and publish remaining limitations.
# Operations ## Before release - Validate configuration and secrets at startup. - Define backup, restore, and rollback procedures and test them. - Document logs, error tracking, health signals, and alert ownership. - Set dependency update and vulnerability review expectations. ## Incident checklist 1. Contain the issue without destroying evidence or user data. 2. Record the timeline and affected scope. 3. Rotate exposed secrets and revoke compromised sessions or credentials. 4. Restore from a verified source when needed. 5. Document the root cause, remediation, and regression test. ## Launch constraint Do not market omitted RoboForm capabilities as implemented. The v1 non-goals in `PRODUCT.md` remain user-visible limitations until they are deliberately delivered.
$ choose a build depth, inspect the files, then open the complete pack in your agent · this prompt is generated from the build plan · improve it via PR
People still pay for RoboForm because security products are paid for because expert review, infrastructure, and accountability matter more than recreating screens. The recurring cost buys cryptography, secure updates, key recovery, threat intelligence, relay capacity, abuse response, audits, and incident handling, not just the visible interface.
xdecades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support
xindependent security audits
xglobal relay infrastructure
xbreach monitoring data
xaccount recovery and support
Don't feel like building it? These folks already made it free.
all 5 free alternatives to RoboForm →· no votes, no pay-to-list · just what's real
RoboForm pricing
| plan | monthly | annual (per mo) | what you get |
|---|---|---|---|
| free | $0/user | $0/user | Unlimited passwords on 1 device |
| premium | — | $2.49/user | 1 account; unlimited devices; breach monitoring for up to 5 email addresses |
| family | — | $3.98/workspace | Up to 5 Premium accounts |
free tierUnlimited passwords on 1 device
billingannual only for paid personal plans; first-year and multi-year promotions
hidden costsThe advertised acquisition price can rise to the regular renewal rate; tax/VAT and app-store pricing may differ, and multi-device use requires Premium
verified 2026-08-14 · source ↗
Vibecode RoboForm
Not really. RoboForm's value is not the code: Recheck price before merge. See the honest breakdown above.
How much does RoboForm cost?
RoboForm costs about $2.49/month (Premium, checked 2026-07-31), which is $29.880000000000003 per year.
What do I lose by replacing RoboForm?
Honestly: decades of form compatibility, browser extensions, sync, recovery, and support; independent security audits; global relay infrastructure; breach monitoring data; account recovery and support. If any of those are load-bearing for you, keep paying.
Is there an open-source alternative to RoboForm?
Yes: Vaultwarden (Bitwarden’s clients pointed at your own server; unofficial, capable, and now you are the outage.) KeePassXC (A vault file on your disk with excellent autofill; syncing and sharing are deliberately somebody else’s job.) AliasVault (Passwords, passkeys, and disposable inboxes in one vault; self-host it and mail delivery joins your chores.) All 5 curated free alternatives are at vibecodeit.com/roboform/alternatives. The prompt is for when you want it exactly your way.