Hostname Not Verified please revert to 2.2.6 where IP Address can be used for Self Hosted Docker #1090

Closed
opened 2025-11-26 22:38:48 -06:00 by GiteaMirror · 6 comments
Owner

Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Aug 29, 2020).

Describe the Bug

Steps To Reproduce

  1. Install certificate.crt file from self-signed docker installation
  2. Change server settings to your self hosted docker like https://192.168.0.123:5555
  3. Try to login

Expected Result

Be able to connect to Bitwarden self hosted instance and use it normally, just as it is possible on the desktop.

Actual Result

An error has occurred. EXCEPTION MESSAGE: Hostname: 192.168.0.123 not verified: Certificate sha1/<> DN: CN=192.168.0.123, OU=Bitwarden, O=Bitwarden Inc., I=Santa Barbara ST=California, C=US, SubjectAltNames: 192.168.0.123

Environment

  • Device: Samsung Galaxy Note 10
  • Operating system: Android 10
  • Build Version: 2.3.0
  • Is this a Beta release? [Y/N] N

Additional Context

Version 2.2.6 worked fine but the latest updates throw an error message saying that you cannot connect to Docker Self Hosted Bitwarden because hostname is not verified but the IP address is self signed.

It is not always possible to setup DNS relay just for this one thing.

Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Aug 29, 2020). <!-- Comment: Please do not submit feature requests. The [Community Forums][1] has a section for submitting, voting for, and discussing product feature requests. [1]: https://community.bitwarden.com --> ## Describe the Bug <!-- Comment: A clear and concise description of what the bug is. --> ## Steps To Reproduce <!-- Comment: How can we reproduce the behavior: --> 1. Install certificate.crt file from self-signed docker installation 2. Change server settings to your self hosted docker like ``https://192.168.0.123:5555`` 3. Try to login ## Expected Result <!-- Comment: A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen. --> Be able to connect to Bitwarden self hosted instance and use it normally, just as it is possible on the desktop. ## Actual Result <!-- Comment: A clear and concise description of what is happening. --> **An error has occurred. EXCEPTION MESSAGE: Hostname: 192.168.0.123 not verified: Certificate sha1/<<shasum>> DN: CN=192.168.0.123, OU=Bitwarden, O=Bitwarden Inc., I=Santa Barbara ST=California, C=US, SubjectAltNames: 192.168.0.123** ## Environment - Device: Samsung Galaxy Note 10 - Operating system: Android 10 - Build Version: 2.3.0 - Is this a Beta release? [Y/N] N ## Additional Context <!-- Comment: Add any other context about the problem here. --> Version 2.2.6 worked fine but the latest updates throw an error message saying that you cannot connect to Docker Self Hosted Bitwarden because hostname is not verified but the IP address is self signed. It is not always possible to setup DNS relay just for this one thing.
Author
Owner

@jdubz666 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2020):

+1

I think I'm experiencing the same issue

@jdubz666 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2020): +1 I think I'm experiencing the same issue
Author
Owner

@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 12, 2020):

I had this issue on my Samsung S9 phone and S3 tablet. What fixed it for me was generating the certificate with a SAN attribute. If using ADCS, this was useful to me.

http://terenceluk.blogspot.com/2017/09/adding-san-subject-alternative-name.html

@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 12, 2020): I had this issue on my Samsung S9 phone and S3 tablet. What fixed it for me was generating the certificate with a SAN attribute. If using ADCS, this was useful to me. http://terenceluk.blogspot.com/2017/09/adding-san-subject-alternative-name.html
Author
Owner

@DrIntensive commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2021):

First of all sorry about my English. I think I found the solution (in my case).
I deployed 2 containers: Bitwarden without certificate and Bitwarden with certificate. You only have to call them different, also different ports. For example "Bitwarden" at 70:80 and "Bitwardenwoc" at 71:80, using the first as certified one. But the same port of destiny.
In that cases use the certified one for browsers and the other for the app.
Note: Browser's extensions works with both of them.

  • docker run -d --name bitwarden -v /bw-data/:/data/ -p 71:80 bitwardenrs/server:latest
  • docker run -d --name bitwardencert --restart unless-stopped -v /bw-data/:/data/ -v /etc/ssl/certs:/ssl -e ROCKET_TLS='{certs="/ssl/bitwarden.crt",key="/ssl/bitwarden.key"}' -p 70:80 bitwardenrs/server:latest

I hope this is helpfully

@DrIntensive commented on GitHub (Feb 10, 2021): First of all sorry about my English. I think I found the solution (in my case). I deployed 2 containers: Bitwarden without certificate and Bitwarden with certificate. You only have to call them different, also different ports. For example "Bitwarden" at 70:80 and "Bitwardenwoc" at 71:80, using the first as certified one. But the same port of destiny. In that cases use the certified one for browsers and the other for the app. Note: Browser's extensions works with both of them. - docker run -d --name bitwarden -v /bw-data/:/data/ -p 71:80 bitwardenrs/server:latest - docker run -d --name bitwardencert --restart unless-stopped -v /bw-data/:/data/ -v /etc/ssl/certs:/ssl -e ROCKET_TLS='{certs="/ssl/bitwarden.crt",key="/ssl/bitwarden.key"}' -p 70:80 bitwardenrs/server:latest I hope this is helpfully
Author
Owner

@atpanos commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2021):

@bachmannn any news ? here still not working with latest release.

EDIT: installing 2.2.6, logging in and then updating through play store did the trick for me.

@atpanos commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2021): @bachmannn any news ? here still not working with latest release. EDIT: installing 2.2.6, logging in and then updating through play store did the trick for me.
Author
Owner

@DrIntensive commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2021):

As I said, in my method is still working

@DrIntensive commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2021): As I said, in my method is still working
Author
Owner

@djsmith85 commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2022):

@bachmannn and @jdubz666 Are you still experiencing this issue?

I'm closing this now, due to the other reports but can easily be re-opened if you are still experiencing issues.

@djsmith85 commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2022): @bachmannn and @jdubz666 Are you still experiencing this issue? I'm closing this now, due to the other reports but can easily be re-opened if you are still experiencing issues.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/android#1090