Skip to content

[META] Feature Requests #246

Open
Open

Description

@dani-garcia

To avoid cluttering the issue tracker with feature requests, please comment any requests here and we'll keep a list.

When available, I've linked a related issue or comment to add context to the request.

Authentication

Database support

Admin page

Security

Docker images

Other

If anyone wants to help implementing these features, we are available here or on the matrix channel to help guide you as much as we can.

Activity

  1. pinned this issue on Dec 13, 2018
  2. unpinned this issue on Dec 13, 2018
  3. quthla commented on Dec 22, 2018

    @quthla

    What is needed for #241? Seems somebody already posted the needed changes in the corresponding issue so that could maybe be integrated?

  4. dani-garcia commented on Dec 22, 2018

    @dani-garcia
    OwnerAuthor

    Yes, someone would have to check those changes, see what can be integrated into the project directly (possibly a config option for the mount point) and create the documentation on how to configure the vault, proxy, etc.

  5. mprasil commented on Jan 15, 2019

    @mprasil
    Contributor

    @dpffxhad added it to the list

  6. Peneheals commented on Jan 16, 2019

    @Peneheals

    It would be great to see an (admin) feature which can help sysops to test mailing functionality. Maybe somewhere a button which can send a test e-mail to the actual user's address and which gives back a fail/success message after the action.

  7. mprasil commented on Jan 16, 2019

    @mprasil
    Contributor

    Good idea @Peneheals, @njfox what do you think?

  8. p-rintz commented on Jan 16, 2019

    @p-rintz

    Would it be possible to introduce 2FA auth to the /admin panel as well?

  9. njfox commented on Jan 16, 2019

    @njfox
    Contributor

    Good idea @Peneheals, @njfox what do you think?

    I also think that's a good idea, and it shouldn't be too difficult to implement. I can look at adding the necessary API endpoints once I find some time, or knowing @dani-garcia he'll probably get to it first

  10. dani-garcia commented on Jan 16, 2019

    @dani-garcia
    OwnerAuthor

    About 2fa:
    To do this, we'll need to implement it separately from the already existing 2fa code. I'm not sure if for this case it's worth it to implement multiple 2fa systems, so I would think just totp and maybe email would be good enough.

    That said, this would require some changes to the admin page to input the 2fa code: we can't just ask for it at the start because it changes every 30 seconds .

    Edit: About the email, as a workaround, you can invite yourself to test if it works for now, but it would be great to add

  11. pinned this issue on Jan 25, 2019
  12. chinenual commented on Feb 2, 2019

    @chinenual

    I am having trouble getting an Apache reverse-proxy to work in my organization. For various reasons, I can't create a new subdomain for bitwarden - i need to run it as https://my.proxy.domain/bitwarden forwarding to localhost running http on a non-standard port. However I cannot find a way to get Apache's mod_proxy to proxy from /bitwarden context to root context. For other applications I'm able to create proxies to as long as the target application uses a non-root context.

    I.e. I want to do this:

    https://my.proxy/bitwarden <-> http:/localhost:1234

    I can get other apps to work if the internal app uses non-root context -- e.g.

    https://my.proxy/acontext <-> http:/localhost:1234/anothercontext

    Can bitwarden_rs be configured to listen to /bitwarden_rs or /bitwarden instead of / ? If not, can someone help in constructing apache mod_proxy / mod_rewrite rules to proxy the bitwarden_rs root context from a non-root proxy context?

  13. mprasil commented on Feb 2, 2019

    @mprasil
    Contributor

    @chinenual see #71. The TL/DR is that while bitwarden_rs doesn't mind serving from a sub path, client apps don't support that. There was some effort modifying the Vault code to allow this, but I haven't seen anyone reporting that they got it working.

  14. 234 remaining items

  15. hellfish2 commented on Oct 20, 2021

    @hellfish2

    Please consider adding granular access
    Captura de Pantalla 2021-10-20 a la(s) 17 58 22

  16. p3lim commented on Oct 21, 2021

    @p3lim

    Please considering supporting the Admin Password Reset feature, including the organization policies for automatic (forceful) enrollment.

  17. zocimek commented on Oct 26, 2021

    @zocimek
  18. fyrak1s commented on Nov 1, 2021

    @fyrak1s

    Hi, I would like to request a feature to support deduplication of password entries. This is the major pain point for me with vaultwarden.

    I've imported passwords from many different browsers and sources and this has created a mess, in which I have every password duplicated about 5 times.
    Also it is not easy to manually bulk delete or even compare entries. It is an impossible task for hundreds of passwords to review each entry manually and delete the dupes.

    Other pw managers like lastpass do this automatically.

    So far there are only workarounds to this problem e.g. https://hwrrobotics.com/2020/11/02/duplicate-password-remover-for-bitwarden/ or https://gist.github.com/giabao/f4c3de705f1d7f2c1fd0cde02e7b841d

    And I am not even talking about deleteting/tyding up similar entries (which would be nice), but simply removing obvious 1:1 dupes.

  19. BlackDex commented on Nov 1, 2021

    @BlackDex
    Collaborator

    Hi, I would like to request a feature to support deduplication of password entries. This is the major pain point for me with vaultwarden.

    I've imported passwords from many different browsers and sources and this has created a mess, in which I have every password duplicated about 5 times. Also it is not easy to manually bulk delete or even compare entries. It is an impossible task for hundreds of passwords to review each entry manually and delete the dupes.

    Other pw managers like lastpass do this automatically.

    So far there are only workarounds to this problem e.g. https://hwrrobotics.com/2020/11/02/duplicate-password-remover-for-bitwarden/ or https://gist.github.com/giabao/f4c3de705f1d7f2c1fd0cde02e7b841d

    And I am not even talking about deleteting/tyding up similar entries (which would be nice), but simply removing obvious 1:1 dupes.

    That is something for the clients. See https://community.bitwarden.com/t/duplicate-removal-tool-report/648

  20. Luis-Lourenco commented on Nov 7, 2021

    @Luis-Lourenco
  21. romu70 commented on Nov 11, 2021

    @romu70

    Could you please add the wait-for-it script in the Dockerfile, to poll the availability of the DB? The current container stops when the DB is not available. It would be great if it could simply wait.

  22. BlackDex commented on Nov 11, 2021

    @BlackDex
    Collaborator

    @romu70 If you are using docker-compose you can configure it to have vaultwarden depend on the database container.
    You can also configure the DB_CONNECTION_RETRIES variable to be increased, every retry is a second.
    Or you can add a script like that your self by following this: https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/wiki/Starting-a-Container#customizing-container-startup

  23. lzinga commented on Nov 11, 2021

    @lzinga

    I use vault warden by myself and don't need any organizations, it would be nice to be able to disable organizations and have it remove the prompts for it -
    image

    As the only individual that will be using my locally hosted vault I will not be needing organizations any time soon and it would be nice to remove it from the interface.

  24. p3lim commented on Nov 11, 2021

    @p3lim

    @lzinga the web interface is not made by vaultwarden, it's the official one, vaultwarden simply includes it.

    See https://github.com/bitwarden/web and https://github.com/dani-garcia/bw_web_builds

    If you yourself want to hide it, use an extension like stylus.

  25. LecrisUT commented on Nov 30, 2021

    @LecrisUT

    First of all, could this issue be converted to a discussion so that the feature request discussions can be viewed as threads. This format is so unwieldy IMO.

    Otherwise I have a feature request and design I would like to post for consideration:

    One/Two-way sync with keepass using asymmetric encryption

    Problem being solved

    Securely synchronizing a user's selected passwords with a hosted keepass database. Primarily this helps with sharing passwords with users across these different infrastructures and offer the user a trusted backup plan.

    Design

    1. The user submits their S/MIME or PGP public key to vaultwarden database to be kept track of. Alternatively, use OpenPGP's WKD standard and/or any upcoming S/MIME equivalent, to get the latest valid public key.
    2. The user submits a hosted link where the .kdbx should be uploaded to, preferably via WebDAV or S3.
    3. On change, public key expiration, etc. update a local keepass database copy, encrypt it via the public key, and upload it.
    4. For the other way, the server maintains their own private key so that the user encrypts a different keepass database (could be same database but different encryption). Vaultwarden periodically pulls for changes to that file, decrypts it and synchronizes the local data.

    Why the extra encryption?

    • The database could be a keeshare database that the user wants to share with other internal keepass users, e.g. shared on non-public nextcloud server. The keepass file could be shared on a public hosting provider, e.g. if vaultwarden is someone's self-hosted instance not having access to the other internal network. If the password is not known to be secure, the extra layer will deter attackers accessing the public file. The reverse also holds.
    • Assuming the public keys are hosted, it offers a centralized way of advertising one's credentials are compromised.
    • Database can be re-encrypted with rolling short-term public keys for increased security.
    • User/admin doesn't need to maintain a separate database for internal and external sharing. The database is branched out encrypted for each external link.

    Other issues it can help with

    Depending on which part is being tackled, partial integration of this would help with:

    • Non-asynchronous keepass database sync.
    • Additional user authentication. Same centralized advertisement of compromised credentials.
  26. BlackDex commented on Nov 30, 2021

    @BlackDex
    Collaborator

    @LecrisUT there is a nice https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/discussions/categories/ideas discussion categorie where you could have posted this of course.

    Maybe locking this thread and pointing people to there is a good option. It was mostly intended to serve as a single location with an overview of all requests.
    Regarding the post it self.
    Vaultwarden does not encrypt or decrypt it self (except for jwt tokens or ssl connections). Adding that kind of a layer upon Vaultwarden would make it more harder to maintain. Also, we try to keep as close as possible to Bitwarden as we can, so I think these kind of requests are out of scope.

  27. BlackDex commented on Nov 30, 2021

    @BlackDex
    Collaborator

    This issue is getting a bit large, and since there are discussions available for a while I'm going to lock this topic.
    The first post will still be updated when needed.

    If there are any feature's you currently miss, and are not mentioned in the first post already, please create a new post with your idea/request here: https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/discussions/categories/ideas .

    Thanks for all your ideas and support!

  28. Repository owner locked as too heated and limited conversation to collaborators on Nov 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    enhancementNew feature or requesthelp wantedExtra attention is needednotesUsed for notes or meta issues

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions