This drop-down menu opens, when to click with mouse the text cursor to field somewhere on website. But sometimes Bitwarden is unable to fill the field - there are some websites. Then there would be easy to copy either username and/or password and quickly paste to same field. Currently we have to open browser extension and copy username from there. But there are several clicks needed - first to close automatically opened drop-down menu in place (in field), then open Bitwarden browser extension - sometimes it will load endlessly and does not open. Need to close browser, etc to get it open again. But in field at drop-down menu it opens and would be possible to copy.
Such copy button would copy according what field is active - either username or password.
Here is design idea of drop-down menu, proposed copy button is surrounded with red rectangle:
Welcome, @edmund to the community!
Odds are good when there is an autofill failure, bitwarden is having troubles determining if it is a username, password or TOTP field, which also means it would not know which one to copy.
If you experience an autofill failure, please be sure to report it:
@edmund Welcome to the forum!
Your suggested button would be in the Bitwarden browser extension window. So you would also have to open the extension window. Edit: Didn’t comprehend the suggestion. Will make a new post. 
To be honest, reported these websites already but still no change and still autofill issues persist… Can report again but…
EDIT: reported again Red Hat Academy and DWService websites via that Google Form.
If Bitwarden does not determine properly the field, then there would be good to use same copy button as available at extension, which will open small drop-down menu with choices to copy either username or password. Would be even easier - just copy that button code which already exists in extension.
FYI, Bitwarden can autofill the login form at https://www.redhat.com/en/services/training/red-hat-academy, if you make a linked custom field named username-verification (linked to the Username field).
I’ve already reported many sites. No improvement.
Will Bitwarden ever improve detection?
Are you writing to support the above proposal of implementing a “smart” copy button (designed to automatically detect whether the active field is a username or password field) as a solution to this problem?
This could be a solution, but it would be better if Bitwarden improved the detection.
Just trying to determine if your comments belong in this feature request (for a “smart” copy button), or whether they should be moved into their own topic to discuss Bitwarden’s autofill detection.
@edmund Sorry, I didn’t read your post well enough yesterday – so, you suggest a copy button in the inline autofill menu, right?
Most sites I use at the moment don’t have any autofill problems… so genuine question: when you get suggestions in the inline autofill menu, there are cases where it doesn’t autofill when you click on the entry in the inline autofill menu?
I guess, there are also cases (when autofill detection doesn’t even work well enough), where you don’t even get the suggestions in the inline autofill menu – where would your suggested copy button then be?
PS: This Make the inline autofill menu like the browser extensions itself (look, feel, usage...) is a broader request, but it probably would contain copy button functions as well, so at least a related feature request…
The answer to this is yes; here is an example, if you wish to experiment: https://access.dwservice.net/login.dw#s.
Basically, the request proposes a “smart” copy button located next to each item in the inline pop-up menu, which would detect the type of input field that is active (username, password, etc.), and place the corresponding data in the clipboard.
This should work (and simplify the credential entry process) in some cases, but will also fail in many other cases.
Requirements for this to work:
- Bitwarden recognizes the input field and injects scripts to render the inline autofill icon (with its pop-up menu on field focus or on clicking the icon).
- The website code allows the input field to be modified by Bitwarden’s script injection.
- Bitwarden correctly identifies the input field type.
- The website code allows users to paste data into the input field.
Examples of how this may fail:
- The autofill icon and pop-up menu are not rendered.
- Bitwarden misidentifies the input field type (e.g., mistakenly identifying a username field as an identity data field).
- The website blocks pasting of data into the input fields.
@edmund I updated the title of your feature request (before, it was “copy button to drop-down dialog”). I hope you agree with that change?
PS: We could remove “next to vault items” from the title. @grb
I think a key part of OP’s proposal is that the copy button should be context-sensitive (i.e., automatically copy the password when it detects that the active input field is a password field). This is why I have been calling it a “smart” copy button. I think that Bitwarden uses the terminology “quick copy” to refer to the use of individual buttons for username, password, and TOTP: 
(which is more like the other feature request than this one).
You’re right… I updated the title again, and wanted to keep it short 
, but feel free to take the title to the next level. 
… just did… indeed, a (“smart”) copy button would help in such a case!
Due to my “experiment”, I wanted to let you know, that there is a much simpler way than the one you described: Use the “launch” “pop-out” button of the inline autofill menu:
Then the browser extension window opens the corresponding login item. And with “drag & fill”, you can “drag & drop” the credentials into the fields (if the fields allow that) - here the complete process as a GIF:
Too complicated. Simply improving field recognition and optimizing the inline menu would be the solution.
It’s a simpler variant (some might call it “workaround”) of what OP described. Or do you find this …
… less complicated than my variant?
Did I argue against that?
Yes, of course.
You never did that! All I was saying was that BW should solve the problem and not just skip around it.
It was never my intention to attack you or anything else. If it came across that way, I apologize.
Really??
All good. And I didn’t recognize this as an “attack”. I just “felt misunderstood”, as offering ways to simplify some routines does not imply, that e.g. a feature request like this one would not have validity. (= it remains valid of course)