@ApplegateR this Is happen when I try enable retention policy so I am understanding now

I will make sure disable Retention policy for each app back up because I do not want my bill go high. But I found solution I used Coldline storage 90 day so it is help 🙂
And soon we build s3 storage here with raid. I gotta research more often

@BrutalBirdie +1 that's what I'd do.

@doodlemania2

Cool feature. I've looked for it a lot, and found the username generator on all browsers and platforms. But the browser plugins (Firefox, Chrome and Safari), the mobile apps (ios) and the Macos client don't support the "forwarded email alias" service, only the other 3. My PC client, however, supports this, and it seems to work with the Vaultwarden backend.

Perhaps this feature will be rolled out to the other platforms as well? Hopefully, this is the case. A very useful feature!

Thanks for sharing this feature I was unaware of 😄

@jdaviescoates Thank you too. This was the solution I needed.

@BrutalBirdie thanks a lot! I must have read this page with my mind somewhere else 🙂

I have update the package, the web versions seems to be compatible with the backend.

@fbartels oh that's very interesting!

@girish Yes, vaultwarden sends out e-mails for things like invitations to companies, password resets etc. And there is no way to change the server used in the GUI, only as an environment variable.
So it would be nice if it would be an option to for example use SES or mailgun here.

I don't think it is an issue, however essentially the more restrictive setting (Cloudron or app) will hit first. Looking at the changes at vaultwarden, their defaults are a lot more restrictive than the ones we have set in iptables as a generic default.

I also think this makes much sense. Some apps may require more stringent measures others don't. So while having a basic line of defense from the platform, the apps can add on top where applicable, since only they know which routes to protect more and which are for example just public routes which just have to be prevented from a denial of service attack.

@girish Thanks for a quick fix, It's now working

@marcusquinn good call! Was also waiting for this to propagate through Vaultwarden and then Cloudron. Glad it's here now 🙂

@girish thx for the clarification!

@rmdes my premium finally is over at Bitwarden, so I have finally moved to Vaultwarden, both on desktop (firefox) and mobile (bitwarden client) and it just works perfectly, next step : yubikey

@potemkin_ai in my case, as it's turned out, the issue was due to the fact that I created user, but not his mailbox 🙄

@mazarian thanks for following up!

@necrevistonnezr update was pushed now for 1.22.1

Okay weird update... I changed it to 1G but still received the same error after restarting MySQL service. So then I went back and set it back to 64M default it had (which should have been enough anyways), but then when I tried it again soon after it then suddenly worked importing the JSON file without "Malformed communication packet", it's as if maybe the 1G value worked but wasn't recognized until later? Or it was a total coincidence, I'm not certain which yet. lol.

I'm wondering now if it maybe makes sense to up the max_allowed_packet up a bit though? I mean 64 MB is fine but wondering if it should be closer to 256 MB or something like that instead? I'm not certain if this was even to do with it, but it seemed possible given that it worked soon after tinkering with the values.

Should have been Rustwarden 🙂

@girish
Thanks to both of you!

@scooke said in Bitwarden_rs:

Scaleway Object Storage, where you get 75GB free.

Wow . Never heard of them, but that is a good price.

Wow this is huge! Thanks for the quick update @nebulon !

@timconsidine Thanks for the excellent write up!

@fbartels its a pity - the timeout for locking the session is always set to 15 minutes. right here I would like 5 minutes...

@iamthefij alternately, if the ldap syncer could write the emails to some db field/file and bitwarden_rs can use that as an allow list that would also work.

@fbartels Thanks for the suggestion! Looks like that tool needs the master password every time it performs an action so no automation possible, but still good for periodical manual backups.

@fbartels yep, you're right, I see it listed in the Features Request META issue.

@danigl oh thanks for the heads up, i wonder how we missed the release. I guess since it was over xmas, it somehow got overlooked.