BitWarden - self hosted password manager using vaultwarden/server image

Docker BitWarden - self hosted password manager using vaultwarden/server image

Currently reading
Docker BitWarden - self hosted password manager using vaultwarden/server image

Rusty, your tutorials for setting up bitwarden (and for reverse proxy to make it easier to get to) are fantastic, thank you.

The only issue I have with Bitwarden is that it appears that my portable devices (iphone, ipad...) running Bitwarden do not keep a local copy of the password database...so that if I don't have a working internet connection, I can't access the database if I have logged out of Bitwarden.

One might ask, "Why would you need to access the database if you don't have a live internet connection? After all, if you don't have a connection, there's nothing you need to log in to." And the answer is that I might maintain passwords to Apps on the devices themselves in Bitwarden. Or, I might have the passwords to various wireless access points in Bitwarden, so it's a Catch-22: I can't log onto the internet without the password to the access point, and I can't get the password until I can bring up Bitwarden, which I can't do without an internet connection...

Do you know of a way around this?
 
Tnx for the positive comment. The way BW works is that it does work offline but only for items that are already in the vault and accessible on the device in question.

If you need to make a new entry then you will have to have a connection to BW server side and the use the manual sync option on your devices or wait for the scheduled sync.
 
Tnx for the positive comment. The way BW works is that it does work offline but only for items that are already in the vault and accessible on the device in question.

If you need to make a new entry then you will have to have a connection to BW server side and the use the manual sync option on your devices or wait for the scheduled sync.

How does it work offline for items already in the vault? If I'm logged out of BW on the iPhone, for example, and I want to access the vault, I have to log in. If I go to the "Log in" screen, the only option I'm given is to enter my email address and Master Password, and if I do so, I get "error occurred, not connected to the internet." There is no option for "access database from this device" or similar.
 
Hi, just to mention: I am using a Bitwarden app in my Android mobile device and it WORKS OFFLINE. I can search in the vault while wifi and mobile data were turned off, I can also fill in credentials from Bitwarden vault to local apps. What I don't do is logging off from my Android Bitwarden app. I just only lock on/lock off via fingerprint. By me this is safe enough and user friendly.
Of course, updating, adding new records and syncing the vault will only work when you are online with your device. The same as log on/log off.

And btw. also big thanks to Rusty for his amazing "Bitwarden in Docker" tutorial. :)
 
I think the issue is the "logging off". If I "log off," I'm hosed. If I just close the app, I'm probably fine.
Well I just did another test on iOS. Completely turned the app off, went into airplane mode. After that I managed to log in just fine. But I did forgot to mention that I also use fingerprint to access BW so I’m not entering any credentials.
 
Some findings from after installation procedures (Create account in browser).
Log-in or Create account page is OK
Next stage Account Form is OK (include validations), except "submit" button - doesn't work, seems to be a bug or need an additional setup in the container for browsers (Win OS):
  • Last Chrome Version 74.0.3729.169 (Official Build)
  • Last Opera Version 60.0.3255.95

and the Submit works in IE11 (yes I have this sh.t installed)

Your experiences?
 
So we have to start over? Or can we export settings from mparsil to the new image?
Stop your current container, download the new image and create a new container from it connecting to the same volumes that mparsil image/container was using. That's it. Few min transitions.

The image is identical, just under a different name. Looks like mparsil image will be deprecated.
 
Probably a good idea, after creating the new container, to then delete the mparsil container, to avoid confusion going forward. (Also, if you've set the mparsil container to automatically start up on boot, and don't delete it, you'd end up with two bitwarden containers running simultaneously the next time your system restarted, wouldn't you?)
 
Probably a good idea, after creating the new container, to then delete the mparsil container, to avoid confusion going forward. (Also, if you've set the mparsil container to automatically start up on boot, and don't delete it, you'd end up with two bitwarden containers running simultaneously the next time your system restarted, wouldn't you?)
Definitely no need to have the old image/container running or turned off. When you verify that its working its safe to kill the old container.
 
And how about exporting (backing up) user data? Do I have to do it or will this new version run with them without problem?
All user data are in a DB located inside a /data folder. That folder is connected to the container using an external volume. So the idea is just to connect the new container to that same volume and fire it up. It will connect to the DB and all your data and config will be loaded.
 
Last edited:
Stop your current container, download the new image and create a new container from it connecting to the same volumes that mparsil image/container was using. That's it. Few min transitions.
That worked. Thanks. The only issue I had was reassigning the port. Even though mprasil was stopped, Docker wouldn't allow me to use the same port. So I set mprasil container to "auto" to release the port.

Logged off the Edge Chrome extension and logged in and all was well.
 
That worked. Thanks. The only issue I had was reassigning the port. Even though mprasil was stopped, Docker wouldn't allow me to use the same port. So I set mprasil container to "auto" to release the port.

Logged off the Edge Chrome extension and logged in and all was well.
True, but that's a default for any situation where you have 2 containers with same ports. Still you figured it out.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

So this means that I can copy to its directory from another DiskStation directory and share (using File...
Replies
3
Views
1,449
I'll delete everything I can containers/images/etc, and start fresh over the weekend. While I really like...
Replies
48
Views
6,624
I use it with the Reeder app and wanted to have filtered feeds there. I'll play around with it a bit more.
Replies
61
Views
9,953
I ran across a very complete how-to-install-nextcloud on Docker using the Synology UI (just the UI, not...
Replies
28
Views
8,293
Hello, i just tried to follow these steps above, but all I get is a psql: could not connect to server...
Replies
43
Views
11,344
I discovered if you use fireflyiii/core:latest everything works just fine
Replies
35
Views
16,836

Welcome to SynoForum.com!

SynoForum.com is an unofficial Synology forum for NAS owners and enthusiasts.

Registration is free, easy and fast!

Back
Top