You have like 50 microsoft admin accounts.
You go to login(dot)microsoftonline(dot)com and want to find credentials to use to login.
Since (currently) bitwarden doesn’t sort entries list alphabetically you have to search for credentials, for example [email protected].
Problem: you get the list of all accounts for different domains, not just microsoft admin accounts.
If you use searching for an entry then domain patterns are ignored and bitwarden shows in whole vault.
Solution 1:
If I am on “login(dot)microsoftonline(dot)com” and use search in browser plugin, all entries shown should be compatible only with current domain. So in other words, just as bitwarden checks a domain pattern to select entries for autocompletion, same pattern and rule should be used for searching.
Solution 2:
As I mentioned in another suggestion - just add “always sort entries alphabetically” rather than by last used time, so I don’t have to use searching at all just scroll to proper entry because it’s position on the list will be easily predicted (advantages of alphabetical sorting).
Hi, to clarify, you can have one login to many different services.
For example [email protected] as login to m365 admin and others. Let’s assume that you have 30 different services and entries connected to this login.
Thing is if you are currently trying to login to M365 as an admin (you are on login(dot)microsoftonline(dot)com) and try to find a login to use then you are flooded with different unsorted logins. So you want to search for your login and you will write [email protected] in search field.
Bitwarden then won’t search all entries that are compatible with only login microsoftonline com, but totally all logins for all services. Bitwarden ignores the domain that you are currently on.
If you want a work-around, what I would suggest is to modify your search strategy, to use one of the following options. First, you can specify the account and and domain in the search:
This will bring up unrelated entries, as well, but the one you want should be on top. The following variants are abbreviated, and should float your desired entry to near the top of the list (if not at the top):
john.doe micro
company microsoft
doe@comp login.mic
(this works because the basic search inserts leading and trailing wildcards for each search term, and uses the number of search term hits to prioritize the sorting of the search results).
If you want to restrict your search results to only show the desired login item, which requires a leading > character and explicit wildcards (*). You can then use the + operator to require the presence of a search term. Thus, any of the following should work:
In general I would not use them because the app should behave in more expected way. Users shouldn’t be forced to find a workarounds if the app behaves unexpectedly. I feel that searching through all entries should be done in desktop or we app. Bitwarden plugin is a tool that works in the context and this context is the domain I am currently on because all enetries bitwarden suggests me are always and only for current context.
In my opinion it is consistent and logical that If a tool hints me with login entry for a domain that I am currently on than it’s predictable, expected and ok. If it hints me with 50 entries, because I have 50 logins for this domain that is ok, too. If I want to search through these 50 entries I do, still in current context (current domain). That is expected behaviour. Searching in current context is expected.
I am sure that everyone would agree that it’s logical and should be a default behaviour. At least it there should be an option for configuring this behaviour as default and I would use this option.
I would give browser plugin two options: 1. Search only in entries complying with current context (domain) - same behaviour as hinting entries. 2. Always sort presented entries alphabetically. (don’t use last used entry on top of the list).
As for me, these are two most important features that shoudl be implemented in the browser plugin.
These would make me totally happy because would boost productivity.
These don’t work as expected any my suggestions would simply solve that. I have enormous list of M365 logins and many of them share same login (email address) because I am have a guest account there.
When I search as you suggested:
There are entries not for m365.
The list is not sorted alphabetically again. OMG, why?
How on earth one can use that? Take into account that the list is enormous and I need to scroll.
Please do sorting on the list by login name after searching. The list should be always sorted by that!
According to your screenshot, the search that you typed was:
zbigniew.gra +login.micros
Please note that for the + operator to work, you need to prefix your search expression with the > character to use the advanced search mode. In addition, when using advanced search, you must use explicit wildcards (*) for omitted characters. Thus, I would suggest that you try the following search expression instead:
>+zbigniew.gra* +login.micros*
If necessary, add a third search term (with a + prefix, as well as optional leading and/or trailing wildcards) to narrow the search results only to the accounts you are looking for — for example:
>+zbigniew.gra* +login.micros* +bit*
You can probably shorten the search to some extent, for example. you can try something like the following:
>+zbig* +*micro* +bit*
You can also experiment with search expressions that search only specific fields (e.g., the username and/or website URL), as follows:
>+login.username:ad*@b* +login.uris:*mic*
The above should find accounts that have a username [email protected] used for logging in on a Microsoft portal (it will also show accounts for websites with URLs that contain the substring “mic”, if the account username is an email that starts with the letters “ad”, on a domain that starts with the letter “b”). You may need to experiment with the exact formulation of the search expression to get optimal results.
Hi, thanks for pointing the > character. This works as a workaround. For usual work I must say it will be tedious to always use search function. Bitwarden could be much more helpful if worked as I proposed. What about sorting the list of entries or my other suggestions?
Since your current post/thread is asking for multiple different features, I will close this thread (because discussion gets confusing and vote results become impossible to interpret when a feature request thread encompasses multiple suggestions).
If you still have feature suggestions that are not already covered by existing feature request threads, feel free to open one or more new Feature Request topics (limiting each topic to a single proposed feature).
because would boost productivity.
Take into account that the list is enormous and I need to scroll.
