Password update in Username and Password object is cached incorrectly
Password update in Username and Password object is cached incorrectly
1 vote
Context:
When i need to update a password:
1) i log on the system using linked credentials from a 'Username and Password' object
2) i use autotype password to key in the current password
3) i go to the 'Username and Password' object and create a new password, and save the object
4) i go back to the system and use autotype again to populate the new password.
As is:
The open session on the system caches the password or is linked with the old version of the object, therefore the password populated is still the old one and password changes fails.
If i open a new session, the new password is populated (obviously incorrectly since the password change would not have been completed yet).
To be:
The latest version of the 'Username and Password' object should always be referenced.
Regards,
Justin
All Comments (2)
Hello,
At the moment, this is the expected behavior and not a bug. When you open a session, RDM resolves the credential at that moment, and they will stay with those values until you close and reopen the entry (where another resolve process will happen). The reason for that is for performance (resolving credentials can take some time, depending on your environment) as well as for scenarios where users use either an external credential manager (1Password, Keeper, etc) or prompt for the credentials (to avoid being prompted again).
We've received a similar request to improve the behavior with the reconnection here: https://forum.devolutions.net/topics/52046/updating-credentials-with-an-open-session-doesnt-work-properly-when-re
I will move your thread to the feature request forum and raise the priority on this, as I understand that in certain usage scenarios, the way the application currently works is more cumbersome than helpful. We will have to see what we can do to improve this, it might have to be an additional setting to allow either behavior.
Regards,
Hubert Mireault
Understood. Yes, in this case, an optional setting would be a good option.
Thanks
Justin