-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Uploading files to Vaultwarden for Attachments or Send using Bitwarden Android app v2.18.0 (4572) does not work. #2516
Comments
Looks like the mobile clients send the data in a different way then the web-vault. |
They still also support v1, but they seem to send different kind of parameters. |
It looks like this is an issue of some interpretation of the RFC's and what is commonly used currently. Now they have created a PR after some debugging together with me, but that PR now causes it to be the other way around 😆 . For those who are interested: rwf2/multer#42 |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
As an update, the upstream PR was merged in rwf2/multer@677ce5c and released in multer 2.0.3. |
Unfortunately this issue seems still not fixed for me; same issue, same 404 error. Meanwhile I'm currently using vaultwarden v1.25.1 and the Android app v2022.6.2 (4851). |
Have you installed the |
To give a bit more context. We thought it would have been fixed in 1.25.1, though it caused an issue with mobile client uploads to be broken. So if you are still using that version and have uploaded files via the mobile client. They are probably broken. In 1.25.2 we disabled this, and prevented those file uploads from reporting a false positive successful upload. Now, in the current |
I'm sorry, small typo: I'm currently using the latest vaultwarden v1.25.2. The issue itself has not changed since my bug report: During a file upload in Sends via the Android app I'm still seeing an API access to I'll give the |
Well, that is correct, and that is no issue. Vaultwarden does not support /api/sends/file/v2 (yet). And that causes the clients to switch to the v1 way which works just fine. So that 404 is as intended. But still, uploading works fine since it will use a different way. |
Well, that's the point: The app is not switching to the v1 API for me; does it work for you? Is that an issue of the Android app or the reverse proxy configuration? Using the web app upload works just fine! |
If you are using the And, yes, it works fine for me. Both |
Works perfectly with 1.26.0., thank you! |
Subject of the issue
Uploading files to Bitwarden Send using Bitwarden Android app v2.18.0 (4572) does not work.
Deployment environment
Your environment (Generated via diagnostics page)
Config (Generated via diagnostics page)
Show Running Config
Environment settings which are overridden: DOMAIN, ADMIN_TOKEN
Steps to reproduce
Open latest BItwarden Android app and create a new file in Send. Clicking
Save
results in an error message:Es ist ein Fehler aufgetreten
(german, translates to "An error occurred").Expected behaviour
A Send file is created and can be shared with others.
Actual behaviour
File is not uploaded to Send.
Troubleshooting data
You can upload a file via the web interface without any issue. I just discovered this error using the Bitwarden Android app v2.18.0 (4572). The vaultwarden trace logs show the following:
Vaultwarden Trace Log
It seems that the Bitwarden Android app uses the API
/api/sends/file/v2
(resulting in422 Unprocessable Entity
) whereas the the web interface uses the API/api/sends/file
.To rule out the possibility that the error is coming from the nginx reverse proxy, I've executed the command
curl -sD - -o /dev/null http://localhost/api/sends/file/v2
directly in the vaultwarden container shell. I still get the 404 error:Does vaultwarden not yet implement the v2 api endpoint?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: