Security fixes

This release contains security fixes for the following advisories. We strongly advice to update as soon as possible.

SSO Login CSRF - GHSA-pfp2-jhgq-6hg5, GHSA-w6h6-8r66-hcv7
User/Organization Enumeration - GHSA-hxqh-ff5p-wfr3
SSO existing-user binding - GHSA-j4j8-gpvj-7fqr
GHSA-6x5c-84vm-5j56
SSRF via Icon Endpoint - GHSA-72vh-x5jq-m82g
Some crate’s updated and other minor security enhancements

These are private for now, pending CVE assignment.

https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/releases/tag/1.36.0

Original Reddit discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1t2qd26/vaultwarden_1360_patches_vulnerabilities/

  • excess0680@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Separate from the security fixes, Vaultwarden now lets clients have archiving capabilities. Before this update, I created a separate organization just to archive unused accounts. (Although now I have to deal with “moving” those accounts back to my main collection…)

  • irmadlad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Ooof! I think I have a pretty robust network security deployment. I’m just not convinced 100%, and therefor I am prohibited from deploying any self hosted password manager. Too risky. I know there are 1000s of people who, and kudos to you for being able to sleep at night. Your security must rival the SCIFs.

      • ITGuyLevi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I’m in the camp that believes I’m not that interesting of a target, Bitwarden is a much better target than my Vaultwarden instance. Do I believe that makes me invisible to attackers, nope; if someone is targeting you, relying on an external company doesn’t protect you, it just shifts the risks to them on paper.

      • irmadlad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Basically, because I feel that Bitwarden built this massive network with layers of security that I just don’t possess, and their track record is very good in that regard. Yes, they have had some breaches, but none that I am aware of where its central user database or encrypted vaults were exposed. The latest was a supply chain incident in April 2026 which was part of a broader supply chain attack affecting Checkmarx, not a direct compromise of Bitwarden’s infrastructure.

        • CameronDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          They are also a much bigger target, and can’t hide behind obscurity.

          So its 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

          • irmadlad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Sure, I get that. It’s just two things I don’t selfhost.: Password Managers, and anything financial.