4 ms·

I'm wondering why their enterprise clients are ok with this though. I would have thought they'd get more pressure from them since most businesses would not want

I'm wondering why their enterprise clients are ok with this though. I would have thought they'd get more pressure from them since most businesses would not want to lose all their attachments if there's a problem.

johnchristopher 4y ago
Or maybe businesses forbid attachments in the first place or maybe they haven't realized and are okay with what being now locked in the service. Isn't the bitwarden client opensource enough or the implementation free that someone could come in and modify the export functionality or add the functionality to the API ?
- fomine3 4y ago
  Probably enterprises don't want export feature by user.
  - rsstack 4y ago
    Organization export is separate from the user export and it's only available to administrators. I just checked - it's using the same code and is missing attachments too.
dspillett 4y ago
Perhaps attachments isn't an enterprise priority over things like SSO support and other features that have seen changes and additions?
- rsstack 4y ago
  I only noticed attachments exist after this post. They are pretty hidden away and there are other ways to store SSH keys that do get included in the export.
phpisthebest 4y ago
As an Enterprise Client, I did not even know there was attachments, and i dont know what I would use attachments for...
- mdaniel 4y ago
  Splunk licenses (and likely a ton of other enterprise-y software) are actual files, so when we renew our license, it goes into 1P as an attachment on our Splunk item I recognize that's not what you would use attachments for, but I'm offering that there are enterprises that get benefit from attachments, not just individual users
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    We have Software Asset management tools that manage those assests, This also tracks renewal dates, and various other aspects of Software management that makes password managers not a good fit. Our password manager is just a password manager, I suspect many other organizations are the same.

johnchristopher 4y ago

Or maybe businesses forbid attachments in the first place or maybe they haven't realized and are okay with what being now locked in the service. Isn't the bitwarden client opensource enough or the implementation free that someone could come in and modify the export functionality or add the functionality to the API ?

fomine3 4y ago
Probably enterprises don't want export feature by user.
- rsstack 4y ago
  Organization export is separate from the user export and it's only available to administrators. I just checked - it's using the same code and is missing attachments too.

dspillett 4y ago

Perhaps attachments isn't an enterprise priority over things like SSO support and other features that have seen changes and additions?

rsstack 4y ago
I only noticed attachments exist after this post. They are pretty hidden away and there are other ways to store SSH keys that do get included in the export.

phpisthebest 4y ago

As an Enterprise Client, I did not even know there was attachments, and i dont know what I would use attachments for...

mdaniel 4y ago
Splunk licenses (and likely a ton of other enterprise-y software) are actual files, so when we renew our license, it goes into 1P as an attachment on our Splunk item I recognize that's not what you would use attachments for, but I'm offering that there are enterprises that get benefit from attachments, not just individual users
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  We have Software Asset management tools that manage those assests, This also tracks renewal dates, and various other aspects of Software management that makes password managers not a good fit. Our password manager is just a password manager, I suspect many other organizations are the same.