[GH-ISSUE #488] Admin does not support running on sub-path #302

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-03 01:27:47 +03:00 by kerem · 4 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:47 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @LaszloHont on GitHub (May 23, 2019).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/issues/488

Could bitwarden_rs use relative URLs?

I don't want the world to know about https://bitwarden.example.com/ so I am using https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/. This is not findable in the SSL observatory logs, and privacy is why I am self-hosting.

I have tried starting bitwarden_rs with DOMAIN=https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/ but when I visit https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/admin/ and submit the token I get a 404 from /admin/

Thanks.

Originally created by @LaszloHont on GitHub (May 23, 2019). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/issues/488 Could bitwarden_rs use relative URLs? I don't want the world to know about https://bitwarden.example.com/ so I am using https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/. This is not findable in the SSL observatory logs, and privacy is why I am self-hosting. I have tried starting bitwarden_rs with DOMAIN=https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/ but when I visit https://secure.example.com/bitwarden/admin/ and submit the token I get a 404 from /admin/ Thanks.

kerem

2026-03-03 01:27:47 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
enhancement

bug
labels

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:47 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dani-garcia commented on GitHub (May 24, 2019):

Running on a subdomain won't work unless you apply the patches from https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs/issues/241#issuecomment-436376497.

If the reason you are doing it is exclusively privacy, i would recommend using a less obvious subdomain, like just secure.example.com, or issuing a wildcard certificate which might not make the exact subdomain findable in those logs (I'm not sure if that's how it works, so this might not work).

As far as I know there isn't much we can do here, so I'll close this.

@dani-garcia commented on GitHub (May 24, 2019): Running on a subdomain won't work unless you apply the patches from https://github.com/dani-garcia/bitwarden_rs/issues/241#issuecomment-436376497. If the reason you are doing it is exclusively privacy, i would recommend using a less obvious subdomain, like just secure.example.com, or issuing a wildcard certificate which might not make the exact subdomain findable in those logs (I'm not sure if that's how it works, so this might not work). As far as I know there isn't much we can do here, so I'll close this.

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:48 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gerroon commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2019):

@dani-garcia is there any reason why that patch did not make to the trunk? I personally would like to run it under a subfolder as well but I am not a coder and it seems to me that keeping up the patch with the docker updates quite a bit of involvement if you will.

@gerroon commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2019): @dani-garcia is there any reason why that patch did not make to the trunk? I personally would like to run it under a subfolder as well but I am not a coder and it seems to me that keeping up the patch with the docker updates quite a bit of involvement if you will.

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:48 +03:00

Author

Owner

@dani-garcia commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2019):

Mostly because it requires to hardcode the subfolder directly into the web vault files, which means every person would need to make a specific build for their own subfolder, so we can't distribute a generic version.

@dani-garcia commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2019): Mostly because it requires to hardcode the subfolder directly into the web vault files, which means every person would need to make a specific build for their own subfolder, so we can't distribute a generic version.

kerem commented

2026-03-03 01:27:48 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gerroon commented on GitHub (Jul 3, 2019):

I see, that maks sense. I hope this will be somehow possible in the future

@gerroon commented on GitHub (Jul 3, 2019): I see, that maks sense. I hope this will be somehow possible in the future

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-03 08:36:34 +03:00

[PR #302] [MERGED] implement TTLs for icon cache #2701