Vault Item Labels (tags)

Adding my voice to the chorus. I have been using Bitwarden for years and would have preferred tags over folders from the beginning (not sure why anyone would ever implement an old-fashioned folder structure anymore, unless there was a good reason to enforce rigid hierarchy - and even then, tags/labels are better), but I didn’t feel much pain from the lack of tags until I got some Yubikeys.

Tracking which U2F keys are tied to which accounts is easily and elegantly accomplished with tags, and a PITA to do any other way (adding #tags to other fields has a number of major downsides). I’m sure this will become an issue for more and more users as hardware tokens grow in popularity.

I’m glad this is on the roadmap but discouraged by how long it has been on the roadmap. I don’t suppose there are any updates on the expected implementation timeline?


As a long-time user of Bitwarden, I love to see that this is on the Roadmap but alittle concerned how long its taking… Please prioritize as this is very much needed. I LOVE Bitwarden and tagging would be a great addition to the tools current set of capabilities

1 Like

I want to add my voice for labels/tags and their importance as well.

For me, I like to track their I enter certain personal information, like address or phone number, to know their I need to update if they change. Especially with phone number is so often a second factor, missing it can be a real trouble maker.

Also I like their I use iCloud Hide My Email - if I ever want to cancel my subscription, I want to easily figure out, which sites would be affected and I need to act on.

1 Like

@gralfe89 Welcome to the forum!

It seems to me that for your use-case, entering the information into the Notes field or into a set of custom fields would be a better solution. I don’t quite see how tags would be effective for your application.

@grb if the Notes field would be included in the search it would fit my needs. Clicking through all entries is not that enjoyable experience when you have over 200 entries.

Custom fields are found from search in the desktop app but not on mobile app (iOS here). So the inconsistent experience isn’t great. Also, I find this not a very well fit due a field stores a field name + value and I’m not actually interested in the value.

At the moment, as a workaround, will use the Notes field but looking forward to the actual feature realization. Used before Enpass and they had labels for ages and got used to it and miss it.

The Notes field is included in the search, except for in the mobile apps.

However, the way that I interpreted your comment, I was imagining that you had personal information stored in an Identity item in your vault, and you wanted to keep track of the websites where you had used this personal information. In that case, it seems that a search would not be necessary, if you just update the Notes section of the Identity item to maintain a running list of all websites where you have auto-filled or copy-pasted information from that Identity.

The Notes field is included in the search, except for in the mobile apps.

The partial support is a bit bummer and tried it again and yes, you are right, it works on desktop. The search matching needs some extension, because I entered in one “Handynummer hinterlegt” and tried to search for “Handy” => not found. “Handynummer” is found. So looks like world-based matching is applied which is, at least for my usage and expectation, not the best desired behavior.

The advantage of labels, like folders, is for me, you see directly in the application which exists and can directly interact with them.
And having them would allow organization in multiple dimensions compared to the single folder an entry can be today. How I use that, should be up to me as a user and a tool shouldn’t be in the way (at least as a general rule of thumb).

You could also find it using a wildcard search: handy*

Insults and rants do not usually get responses when wanting a company to respond to feedback and/or provide updates; so this is as polite as I can possibly make it.
One of the worst things I’ve experienced with any company in community forums is being ignored. BitWarden, one of your customer support specialists needs to step up to the plate and respond in this thread (even if to say the feature is off the roadmap).
Ignoring us when you have responded at other times is disrespectful and is starting to make me reconsider staying with you AND upgrading to a paid account.
Again, in no way is this a rant or being insulting - just provide us with an update please.


Bitwarden reps do participate in the forum from time to time, but at its core, this venue is a community forum, where Bitwarden users (like you or me) interact with each other to provide peer-to-peer support or to discuss possible new features that we’d like to see.

If you are looking for an official answer from Bitwarden, then the best approach is to contact their customer support.

FYI, the Roadmap was last updated on January 19, 2024, so it should still be current.

+1 for tags/labels. We currently have all of our passwords (thousands of entries) on SysPass. We’d like to migrate to Bitwarden, but we absolutely need to tag our entries using both a set of preexisting tags (same across the organization) and allowing users to define their own.

We use tags to organize and quickly search for:
a) Target systems/application
b) Server IP
c) Type of entry (SSH key, certificate, login, boot-time key, etc)
d) Stack layer (user, application, system, network, etc.)
and more.

We thought we could use Custom Fields for this but there is no way to quickly reenter previously used field names so it is prone to typing errors. Same with the Notes field. Tags/Labels would be a much better solution.

We’ll check back in a few months!

Wow! I’m still waiting for this feature just for one simple thing: I would like to tag all the entries that I have recently updated that contain passkeys. Only for that.

In KeePassXC I can tag (for more control) the entries that contain enabled passkeys.

1 Like

I joined the forum just to vote for this.

My other PW manager’s subscription is coming up. Tagging is an obvious feature, and its omission is the first thing I noticed when I gave Bitwarden a try.

A good example of why tagging is needed is for tracking offline TOTP credentials. I don’t save TOTP seeds in my password manager. I securely save the data in another offline location. It is important to be able to tag such PW Manager entries, so I know that I do actually have the seed data saved offline.

The competition and even Keepass have tagging, so the omission of this feature in Bitwarden is noticeable issue.

Please, implement a tagging / labeling feature!

1 Like

I work around this by appending (passkey) or (totp) to the end of the entry’s “name”. The name is free-text not used for anything other than helping you identify the entry. The “username”, on the other hand must match the login to the website.

Could be very useful to me and my family, to be able to know visually which password are in personal vaults, and the ones in the shared collections.
Tags, title colors…

In simple words
Ability to add a single item in multiple categories

  • Either, ability to add an item in multiple folders, instead of just one
  • Or, ability to tag/label an item by multiple tags
1 Like

…this has also been completely removed from the current roadmap. I would love to understand the reasons why you are making such drastic changes to the roadmap. @gtran


Obviously it’s because they don’t have time - why focus on improving your product with the most requested functionalities from customers when you can instead spend your resources on things like “Web app updated styling” and “Browser extension UI refresh”?

Hi all - I made the comment in another thread, outlining the updated format to the roadmap to only show items in development. Vault item labels is something I am personally looking forward to and will be really excited when the team gets to it.


Thanks for confirming tags are still on the plan, @gtran - it has such a clearcut use case and is a clearly missing piece of functionality that I hope it gets afforded proper priority!