github-starred/android
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitwarden/android.git synced 2026-06-10 00:28:29 -05:00
Code Issues 2.2k Packages Projects Releases 127 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #3341] Match detection "Host" not working #38884

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-23 17:07:37 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 29 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:37 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @larena1 on GitHub (Jun 23, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/bitwarden/android/issues/3341

Steps To Reproduce

  1. Create entry with URL https://example.com and match detection "Host"
  2. Navigate to example.com in Chrome
  3. Check native autofill

Expected Result

Entry should be suggested

Actual Result

No suggestions

Screenshots or Videos

No response

Additional Context

No response

Build Version

Native beta 2024.06.00

Environment Details

No response

Issue Tracking Info

  • I understand that work is tracked outside of Github. A PR will be linked to this issue should one be opened to address it, but Bitwarden doesn't use fields like "assigned", "milestone", or "project" to track progress.
Originally created by @larena1 on GitHub (Jun 23, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/bitwarden/android/issues/3341 ### Steps To Reproduce 1. Create entry with URL https://example.com and match detection "Host" 2. Navigate to example.com in Chrome 3. Check native autofill ### Expected Result Entry should be suggested ### Actual Result No suggestions ### Screenshots or Videos _No response_ ### Additional Context _No response_ ### Build Version Native beta 2024.06.00 ### Environment Details _No response_ ### Issue Tracking Info - [ ] I understand that work is tracked outside of Github. A PR will be linked to this issue should one be opened to address it, but Bitwarden doesn't use fields like "assigned", "milestone", or "project" to track progress.
GiteaMirror added the bug label 2026-04-23 17:07:37 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:43 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sammbw commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2024):

Hi there,

I am unable to reproduce this issue, it has been escalated for further investigation. If you have more information that can help us, please add it below.

Thanks!

<!-- gh-comment-id:2185630182 --> @sammbw commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2024): Hi there, I am unable to reproduce this issue, it has been escalated for further investigation. If you have more information that can help us, please add it below. Thanks!
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:44 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@larena1 commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2024):

The match detection type might also be called "host" instead of "server" depending on the language. I set my GitHub login to that match detection type and autofill will not suggest me that entry anymore after.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2186525978 --> @larena1 commented on GitHub (Jun 24, 2024): The match detection type might also be called "host" instead of "server" depending on the language. I set my GitHub login to that match detection type and autofill will not suggest me that entry anymore after.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:45 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@larena1 commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024):

@lucas-livefront since you implemented 0c6ea8d18d

It seems host matching requires a port now but I think Android native autofill does never supply a port and most people probably also don't store their entries with a port in the URL. Could that be the issue why host matching is not working currently anymore?

0c6ea8d18d (diff-4b72c0b9932ed2cc3fd655597753819c2062f63eb4b5ef3151d9cb78f8c3aa15R207)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2189867653 --> @larena1 commented on GitHub (Jun 25, 2024): @lucas-livefront since you implemented https://github.com/bitwarden/android/commit/0c6ea8d18da02c7e13f458c0d052fa293df63f70 It seems host matching requires a port now but I think Android native autofill does never supply a port and most people probably also don't store their entries with a port in the URL. Could that be the issue why host matching is not working currently anymore? https://github.com/bitwarden/android/commit/0c6ea8d18da02c7e13f458c0d052fa293df63f70#diff-4b72c0b9932ed2cc3fd655597753819c2062f63eb4b5ef3151d9cb78f8c3aa15R207
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:46 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@otaconix commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2024):

I'm running into the same issue. What's interesting is that, when I manually lookup the entry I want through the auto-fill flow and tell Bitwarden to "Auto-fill and save", the URL added to the item is exactly the same as another one that was already there.

I haven't grokked the code I've been looking at entirely, but it looks like @larena1's analysis is right on the money. Most URLs are unlikely to contain an explicit port, as they tend to use the implicit default (80 for HTTP and 443 for HTTPS).

If there's anything I can do to help debug this further, let me know!

<!-- gh-comment-id:2211983438 --> @otaconix commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2024): I'm running into the same issue. What's interesting is that, when I manually lookup the entry I want through the auto-fill flow and tell Bitwarden to "Auto-fill and save", the URL added to the item is exactly the same as another one that was already there. I haven't grokked the code I've been looking at entirely, but it looks like @larena1's analysis is right on the money. Most URLs are unlikely to contain an explicit port, as they tend to use the implicit default (80 for HTTP and 443 for HTTPS). If there's anything I can do to help debug this further, let me know!
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:48 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@libreom commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2024):

Bitwarden Autofill on Brave browser on most websites is not working(works on some very few site)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2220592688 --> @libreom commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2024): Bitwarden Autofill on Brave browser on most websites is not working(works on some very few site)
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:50 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nbeeeeeeeeee commented on GitHub (Jul 14, 2024):

I have the same situation. host mode doesn't work.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2227219856 --> @nbeeeeeeeeee commented on GitHub (Jul 14, 2024): I have the same situation. host mode doesn't work.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jul 14, 2024):

For the record,

It's even matching the full URL. I have my default set to host and its trying to match http://localdomain.tld/subdir

<!-- gh-comment-id:2227232139 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jul 14, 2024): For the record, It's even matching the full URL. I have my default set to host and its trying to match `http://localdomain.tld/subdir`
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@larena1 commented on GitHub (Jul 18, 2024):

@david-livefront @shannon-livefront @SaintPatrck

Can you fix this regression maybe? It's a bit surprising that there is no reaction at all in a month. I know the Bitwarden team ignored issues with the old app for years but thought that might change with the new app.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2236867505 --> @larena1 commented on GitHub (Jul 18, 2024): @david-livefront @shannon-livefront @SaintPatrck Can you fix this regression maybe? It's a bit surprising that there is no reaction at all in a month. I know the Bitwarden team ignored issues with the old app for years but thought that might change with the new app.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:54 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nairol203 commented on GitHub (Jul 22, 2024):

+1
same issue for me with host mode

<!-- gh-comment-id:2242086308 --> @nairol203 commented on GitHub (Jul 22, 2024): +1 same issue for me with host mode
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:55 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2024):

Well #3611 certainly improves the user experience. But it should match the port.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2248989076 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2024): Well #3611 certainly improves the user experience. But it should match the port.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:58 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Safemode commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2024):

Also running into this same problem, thought I was going crazy. I have default URI Match Detection set to Host, I go to my internal IP:port, and it doesn't find it. The same issue occurs on the beta app too. If I open up the Autofill and choose to "Add an Item", the URI only has the IP without the port on there.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2265851155 --> @Safemode commented on GitHub (Aug 2, 2024): Also running into this same problem, thought I was going crazy. I have default URI Match Detection set to Host, I go to my internal IP:port, and it doesn't find it. The same issue occurs on the beta app too. If I open up the Autofill and choose to "Add an Item", the URI only has the IP without the port on there.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:07:59 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024):

Using the beta, it was overly greedy for a few days, but now that #3623 landed, it's broken again. I'm unsure which tests this passed as it can't have been a functionality test.

@david-livefront did you test this manually at all?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2273755451 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024): Using the beta, it was overly greedy for a few days, but now that #3623 landed, it's broken again. I'm unsure which tests this passed as it can't have been a functionality test. @david-livefront did you test this manually at all?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:02 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 8, 2024):

pinging @david-livefront did you test the host matching manually at all?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2276087425 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 8, 2024): pinging @david-livefront did you test the host matching manually at all?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:03 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2024):

Afternoon @david-livefront still trying to get information as to what your experience was

<!-- gh-comment-id:2284566747 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 12, 2024): Afternoon @david-livefront still trying to get information as to what your experience was
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:07 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@larena1 commented on GitHub (Aug 14, 2024):

@uniquePWD I think they have some kind of process in place at Bitwarden where @sammbw or somebody else needs to "flag it to the engineers" before the engineers can actually look into requests and reports.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2289132747 --> @larena1 commented on GitHub (Aug 14, 2024): @uniquePWD I think they have some kind of process in place at Bitwarden where @sammbw or somebody else needs to "flag it to the engineers" before the engineers can actually look into requests and reports.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:09 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 14, 2024):

I understand that there's a lot of noise that's inevitably neccessary to blank out in order to maintain productivity. But surely keep an eye on things that you're working on. Especially when you land something. In this case, the landing actually caused a regression. Being able to juggle work and keep an eye on the bug tracker is part and parcel of development. It's harder when it's open source and I get that too. But the whole point of a public beta is that it enables us to catch things early and for the developers to react in an agile manner. We are all trying to work towards the best BitWarden release ever. Let's make that happen together.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2289245616 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Aug 14, 2024): I understand that there's a lot of noise that's inevitably neccessary to blank out in order to maintain productivity. But surely keep an eye on things that you're working on. Especially when you land something. In this case, the landing actually caused a regression. Being able to juggle work and keep an eye on the bug tracker is part and parcel of development. It's harder when it's open source and I get that too. But the whole point of a public beta is that it enables us to catch things early and for the developers to react in an agile manner. We are all trying to work towards the best BitWarden release ever. Let's make that happen together.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:11 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@vvolkgang commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2024):

👋🏾 I meant to share an updated earlier but dropped the ball, for which I'm sorry. During our research we concluded that the Autofill Framework isn't sending us the port as expected. While we'll continue to monitor how to provide this functionality, based on your feedback we'll discuss reverting the recent changes and how that will impact other areas of the product.

Thank you for your feedback and patience 🙏🏾

<!-- gh-comment-id:2356217837 --> @vvolkgang commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2024): 👋🏾 I meant to share an updated earlier but dropped the ball, for which I'm sorry. During our research we concluded that the Autofill Framework isn't sending us the port as expected. While we'll continue to monitor how to provide this functionality, based on your feedback we'll discuss reverting the recent changes and how that will impact other areas of the product. Thank you for your feedback and patience 🙏🏾
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024):

So the attempted fix finally made it to release, though it skipped beta. It's now matching domain properly, but not host (port). Is anyone actually testing things?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2453971337 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024): So the attempted fix finally made it to release, though it skipped beta. It's now matching domain properly, but not host (port). Is anyone actually testing things?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:14 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Safemode commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024):

I can also confirm from my testing on the recently released 2024.11.0 version, that while the Default URI Match Detection is set to Host, it matches the domain/IP, but does not match the port, and I'm seeing all entries for that domain/IP in the auto-fill shortcut/keyboard. I also went ahead and wiped the app data, as well as reinstalled just to make sure I was still consistently encountering this issue. And if I choose to Add an Entry in Bitwarden from a site, it's only capturing the domain/IP and is not including the port in the URI.

Edit: Tested this out on my iPad which is currently running 2024.9.2, and the Default URI Match Detection on Host works exactly as expected. I only see the 1 website in the auto-fill list, and when adding an entry it contains the Port, as well as any other data after the initial domain/IP.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2454836467 --> @Safemode commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024): I can also confirm from my testing on the recently released 2024.11.0 version, that while the Default URI Match Detection is set to Host, it matches the domain/IP, but does not match the port, and I'm seeing all entries for that domain/IP in the auto-fill shortcut/keyboard. I also went ahead and wiped the app data, as well as reinstalled just to make sure I was still consistently encountering this issue. And if I choose to Add an Entry in Bitwarden from a site, it's only capturing the domain/IP and is not including the port in the URI. Edit: Tested this out on my iPad which is currently running 2024.9.2, and the Default URI Match Detection on Host works exactly as expected. I only see the 1 website in the auto-fill list, and when adding an entry it contains the Port, as well as any other data after the initial domain/IP.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:15 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Safemode commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024):

@david-livefront Have you had any chance to take a look as to why this is still not working? 2024.11.0 (and even up through 2024.11.4 Beta Tester availability) still does not properly show individual Host entries with the Host URI Matching on Android. And adding an entry still cuts off the port and any later URI details. This problem is only happening on Android, the iOS version of the app works exactly as expected with Host URI Matching set as default.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2468538649 --> @Safemode commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024): @david-livefront Have you had any chance to take a look as to why this is still not working? 2024.11.0 (and even up through 2024.11.4 Beta Tester availability) still does not properly show individual Host entries with the Host URI Matching on Android. And adding an entry still cuts off the port and any later URI details. This problem is only happening on Android, the iOS version of the app works exactly as expected with Host URI Matching set as default.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:17 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024):

👋🏾 I meant to share an updated earlier but dropped the ball, for which I'm sorry. During our research we concluded that the Autofill Framework isn't sending us the port as expected. While we'll continue to monitor how to provide this functionality, based on your feedback we'll discuss reverting the recent changes and how that will impact other areas of the product.

Thank you for your feedback and patience 🙏🏾

Any update @vvolkgang

<!-- gh-comment-id:2468777643 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024): > 👋🏾 I meant to share an updated earlier but dropped the ball, for which I'm sorry. During our research we concluded that the Autofill Framework isn't sending us the port as expected. While we'll continue to monitor how to provide this functionality, based on your feedback we'll discuss reverting the recent changes and how that will impact other areas of the product. > > Thank you for your feedback and patience 🙏🏾 Any update @vvolkgang
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:18 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@vvolkgang commented on GitHub (Nov 14, 2024):

@Safemode @uniquePWD 👋🏾 In https://github.com/bitwarden/android/issues/3341 we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers.

In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible.

At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2475069861 --> @vvolkgang commented on GitHub (Nov 14, 2024): @Safemode @uniquePWD 👋🏾 In https://github.com/bitwarden/android/issues/3341 we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers. In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible. At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:20 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 14, 2024):

@Safemode @uniquePWD 👋🏾 In #3341 we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers.

In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible.

At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support.

This has actually worked previously, so it's clearly possible in spite of the AutoFill framework falling short. Are there no native workarounds? What about leveraging the browser extension to provide the host (URI + port)? Is that a possibility?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2476050275 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Nov 14, 2024): > @Safemode @uniquePWD 👋🏾 In #3341 we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers. > > In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible. > > At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support. This has actually worked previously, so it's clearly possible in spite of the AutoFill framework falling short. Are there no native workarounds? What about leveraging the browser extension to provide the host (URI + port)? Is that a possibility?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:23 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@benkap commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2024):

+1
same issue, seems that the port is ignored 2024.11.7

<!-- gh-comment-id:2552093303 --> @benkap commented on GitHub (Dec 18, 2024): +1 same issue, seems that the port is ignored `2024.11.7`
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:26 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2025):

@vvolkgang any updates?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2618196045 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jan 28, 2025): @vvolkgang any updates?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:28 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@manduted commented on GitHub (Jan 31, 2025):

same issue, seems that the port is ignored 11.5 11.6 12.0 25.1.0 25.1.1

However, the release notes this issue has been fixed..In reality, it did not work.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2626705637 --> @manduted commented on GitHub (Jan 31, 2025): same issue, seems that the port is ignored 11.5 11.6 12.0 25.1.0 25.1.1 However, the release notes this issue has been fixed..In reality, it did not work.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:30 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jan 31, 2025):

Hilariously, it's now doing the exact opposite

<!-- gh-comment-id:2626710045 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Jan 31, 2025): Hilariously, it's now doing the exact opposite
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:31 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mycarrysun commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2025):

@Safemode @uniquePWD 👋🏾 In #3341 we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers.

In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible.

At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support.

This has worked fine previously on mobile in android and now with the new redesigned app it does not work. I would consider that a regression so it's not android that's the problem. Maybe we should look at how the legacy app used to detect the host+port?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2646331066 --> @mycarrysun commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2025): > [@Safemode](https://github.com/Safemode) [@uniquePWD](https://github.com/uniquePWD) 👋🏾 In [#3341](https://github.com/bitwarden/android/issues/3341) we updated our Host matching to include Port validation when available. This worked for me using Accessibility Autofill tile, but the behaviour might vary across different devices, operating systems, and browsers. > > In our testing we never get a Port from Android's Autofill Framework. In these cases, we fall back to IP-only matching to ensure users still get relevant suggestions. You can verify this by initiating the autofill process and adding a new item - the URI received by the app will be visible. > > At this point I'm not sure what else we could look into to improve the Autofill Framework support here and I'd welcome any suggestions for improving our Autofill Framework support. This has worked fine previously on mobile in android and now with the new redesigned app it does not work. I would consider that a regression so it's not android that's the problem. Maybe we should look at how the legacy app used to detect the host+port?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-23 17:08:34 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2025):

Someone just posted something that may be insightful over at https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/issues/9329#issuecomment-2646603294

<!-- gh-comment-id:2646606409 --> @uniquePWD commented on GitHub (Feb 9, 2025): Someone just posted something that may be insightful over at https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/issues/9329#issuecomment-2646603294
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
app:authenticator
app:password-manager
bug
bug-passkey
customer-support
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
needs-reply
needs-response
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
No Label bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/android#38884
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?