Kelly Grant Fortin

Hello,

We are posting this request on behalf of another of our customers.

Current behavior

When a user requests temporary access to an entry in Remote Desktop Manager or the Devolutions Server web interface, the duration always starts at 30 minutes. This default cannot be changed, so the requester has to select a longer duration on every request.

Request

Allow administrators to configure the default duration of Temporary access requests, for example in the Temporary access settings of a vault, folder or entry, alongside the Mode and Authorizers.

Use case

The customer uses Temporary access to control access to production servers, and users request access to each server separately. Their work sessions are usually longer than 30 minutes. A configurable default would match the request to their typical session length, without having to change it on each request.

We are sharing this request on the forum to see whether other customers and community members are interested. If this would be useful to you, please let us know in the replies. This helps us prioritize requests.

Good day,

We've recently updated to 2026.2.13.0 from the old 2026.1.22.0 and noticed the search in Password List stopped searching in the Description field. 2026.2.14.0 also does not

We have several Password Lists where we search througout the different fields "Username", "Domain" and "Description".

Is it possible to modify the search component so we can search in all the fields again?

Please let me know if you need any more information.

Thanks!

Sander

@sander02

Hi Sander,

Thanks for the detailed report, and for testing on both 2026.2.13 and 2026.2.14. This matches a pattern we've seen from other customers — Password List search working correctly on 2026.1.x, then narrower after upgrading to 2026.2.12 or later, with the Description field no longer included in the search. Our team is aware.

We'll update this thread if there's more to share on a fix version.

Kelly

Hello, just a quick question - wondering if there's a way to make a website entry "remember" an exception, for example if it references a site with an invalid/self-signed cert and I accept/bypass the warning - so that I don't get the warning next time?

Any help is appreciated, thanks!

@davidwillis

Hi David,

Yes — there's a setting called Ignore certificate errors in the Website entry properties under Settings. Enabling it stops the certificate warning from appearing for that entry on future launches.

Docs reference: https://docs.devolutions.net/rdm/knowledge-base/troubleshooting-articles/web-browser-google-chrome/

One thing to note: this suppresses cert warnings entirely for that entry rather than "remembering" a specific exception the way a browser would — so if the certificate ever changed, you wouldn't see a warning. For an internal site with a known self-signed cert, that's usually the right tradeoff.

Hope this helps!

Kelly

Hello @tonyfredriksson . Just in case...

The Gateway logs

https://docs.devolutions.net/gateway/kb/troubleshooting-articles/gateway-troubleshooting/#devolutions-gateway-logs-and-diagnostics

The Scheduler logs need to be enabled and a folder configured.

https://docs.devolutions.net/server/kb/knowledge-base/scheduler-service-general-information/#enable-scheduler-logging

Kind regards,

Kelly

@pvansluisveld I sent you a private message with a method to assist you with the Web Application widget.

Kind regards,

Kelly

@pvansluisveld We believe this issue with the web app widget has been corrected in the 2026.1.14.0 release. The web app widget was incorrectly displaying the existing instances.

@Kelly Grant Fortin

Hello, thank you for informing me. I've updated our Devolutions Servers in our test/acceptation environment to the latest version 2026.1.15.0. Is there a way to delete all Web Application widgets with status Last updated 2 hours ago or longer? At the moment we have a lot of widgets that we have to delete 1-by-1. If I have to do this manually it will take a longtime. My question: Is there a way to automate this so I can delete all inactieve Web App widgets?

@pvansluisveld

I am not aware of a way to delete these Web application widget listings in bulk from the WebUI. Maybe PowerShell could remove these. I will ask internally.

@pvansluisveld We have an option for you. I am just verifying that I have the correct details before I send it to you. Thank you for your patience.

@pvansluisveld We believe this issue with the web app widget has been corrected in the 2026.1.14.0 release. The web app widget was incorrectly displaying the existing instances.

@Kelly Grant Fortin

Hello, thank you for informing me. I've updated our Devolutions Servers in our test/acceptation environment to the latest version 2026.1.15.0. Is there a way to delete all Web Application widgets with status Last updated 2 hours ago or longer? At the moment we have a lot of widgets that we have to delete 1-by-1. If I have to do this manually it will take a longtime. My question: Is there a way to automate this so I can delete all inactieve Web App widgets?

@pvansluisveld

I am not aware of a way to delete these Web application widget listings in bulk from the WebUI. Maybe PowerShell could remove these. I will ask internally.

@pvansluisveld We believe this issue with the web app widget has been corrected in the 2026.1.14.0 release. The web app widget was incorrectly displaying the existing instances.

Our developers are working on a correction. Not sure when it will be available yet.

Kind regards,

Kelly

I am testing the docker container as well, and am noticing the same issue. I only have one container but its filling up the web application widget which makes it unusable. I am going to be deploying a 2nd docker instance for an HA pair, but if we can't see the health of the containers in this widget due to it being filled with hundreds or thousands of entries, its concerning. Please let us know what you find.

@Jeff Kowalenko

I have reached out internally again to get an update on the web app widget functionality. Thank you for your patience.

Hello,

This process is similar to setting up a staging instance of the DVLS. Please review the following and let us know what questions remain.

https://docs.devolutions.net/server/kb/how-to-articles/create-server-staging-instance/

Kind regards,

Kelly

Hello @pvansluisveld Thank you for the additional details — that helps clarify the situation.

Since you are running 2 DVLS instances (primary and hot spare) using the same URL, it is possible that both instances are being registered or reported in a way that causes duplicate entries in the web application widget. Given that there are no functional issues and the behavior appears to be limited to the widget display, this does suggest it may be a visual/reporting issue rather than an actual duplication of services. I will continue to follow up with our QA and development teams to better understand how the Web Application widget (Administration Dashboard) handles multiple instances sharing the same URL in this type of setup.

In the meantime, if you notice any changes in the number of entries or behavior, please let us know. Thank you for your patience.

Kind regards,

Kelly

Hello. Thank you for reaching out with these questions.

At first glance, I do not know why the Web Application widget on the System Dashboard would show a duplicate of the DVLS instance every 5 minutes..?..

It looks like you have 2 DVLS instances. Am I reading this correctly?

Are there ever more than 2 listings for each instance, or do they keep cycling so there are always 2 listed for each instance? Never more than 2 listed?

Are you experiencing any functionality issues with accessing endpoints and the like? Is this solely an information display issue with our Web Application widget for now?

I will reach out to our QA and Dev groups for feedback. Thank you for your patience.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

Devolutions Server supports authentication with Microsoft Entra ID without requiring an on-premises Active Directory.

The recommended approach is to configure Microsoft authentication using an Azure App Registration (OpenID Connect), as outlined in our documentation here:

https://docs.devolutions.net/server/kb/how-to-articles/azure-portal-configuration-guide-microsoft-authentication/

This allows authentication to be handled entirely through Entra ID. Proper configuration of the application registration and claims is important to ensure permissions and group mappings behave as expected.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

RDM and Devolutions Server are primarily designed for secure access management, credential storage, and centralized operational documentation. While they can certainly be used to organize and store license and asset information using structured entries, they are not positioned as full IT documentation or business management platforms in the same way as tools like ITFlow.

Because these platforms serve different primary purposes, whether RDM + DVLS can act as your “main system” for license and asset management depends on the depth and type of asset tracking you require. If your focus is secure, permission-based organization of technical information and credentials, they may be sufficient. If you require broader ITAM or business management capabilities, that should be considered in your evaluation.

Kind regards,

Kelly

Hello @Valentin,

Is RDM Teams + Devolutions Server a good fit for this kind of separation (technical vs restricted license-only user)?

Yes. The Devolutions Server introduces vaults, permissions, and network integration to share access to different entries for different users.

Is my approach (separate vaults + separate license entries + granular permissions) the right way to design this?

Yes. Vaults are a great way to achieve separation of access for different users and groups.

I’ve read in some places that Devolutions Server might be limited to a single user in the future. Can someone confirm if this is accurate?

There is a version of Devolutions Server (DVLS) which is free for one user. Not sure if this is what you mean. One of the benefits of the DVLS is the network integration, like with AD domains. This allows the customer to use existing AD users and groups to access the DVLS and its resources. The domain groups can also be used for DVLS permissions assignments, which can replicate role based network access. (I do not see this being reduced to one user.)

I hope this helps you with you design choices.

Kind regards,

Kelly

@hjbos In my testing, I received a notification when I enabled the syslog server option in the logging. My configuration was set deliberately to fail to ensure a notification message was generated. Once the failure to connect massage was received, I removed the syslog option from the logging settings and two notification messages were almost immediately triggered, again stating a failure to connect to the syslog server. I received not further notifications afterward.

How often are you seeing these notifications? It sounds like something went awry with save when removing the syslog option.?. Have you tried to add/remove and resave again? Maybe stop/start the DVLS from the Console after saving the removal of the syslog option.

Thanks for reporting this.

I’ll try to reproduce the behavior on my side to see if I can confirm the same results when disabling the Syslog Server configuration. I’ll report back once I have more information.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

One option could be to use multiple password policies and apply them at the vault level.

For example, if all existing 16-character passwords are stored in the same vault, that vault could be assigned a policy allowing 16 characters, while other vaults use a policy enforcing a 20-character minimum for new or updated credentials.

This allows existing entries to remain valid while enforcing the stronger requirement going forward, depending on how your vault structure is organized.

Kind regards,

Kelly

Hello,

Thank you for mentioning VDI in your response and thanks again for sharing the Event Viewer entry. The event shows an Application Error involving WindowsTerminal.exe, with the fault occurring in ucrtbase.dll. This indicates a runtime level failure. One detail that causes concern is the execution path, which is listed as C:\SnapVolumesTemp\MountPoints\...

There is some concern that RDM may not be managing this path.

Are you familiar with the Portable RDM version? Would it be possible to set up this RDM portable version in a regular file system path on such a host to see if it performs any differently?

https://docs.devolutions.net/rdm/kb/how-to-articles/portable-rdm-installation/

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

Thanks for sharing the Event Viewer entry.

The event shows an Application Error involving WindowsTerminal.exe, with the fault occurring in ucrtbase.dll (Microsoft Universal C Runtime) and exception code 0xc0000409. This indicates a runtime-level failure rather than a PowerShell script error.

One detail that stands out is the execution path shown in the event:

C:\SnapVolumesTemp\MountPoints\...

This is an unexpected execution path compared to a typical local installation.

To help clarify what’s happening, could you please confirm:

1. Whether you’ve tried repairing or reinstalling the Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributables on the affected system

2. Whether any users are running Remote Desktop Manager from a standard local installation path, and if so, whether they see the same behavior or different errors

3. The exact Windows version and build in use

Thank you for the detailed answers.

To help clarify the scope of this issue, I’ve tested the PowerShell Terminal (Local) entry in the following environments:

• DVLS 2025.2.21.0 with RDM 2025.2.30.0

• DVLS 2025.3.12.0 with RDM 2025.3.28.0

In both cases, I was able to create a new PowerShell Terminal (Local) entry (without configuring a host/endpoint), open the terminal, and run commands successfully.

To better understand what may be different in your environment, could you please help confirm the following:

1. Can Windows PowerShell 5 be launched normally outside of RDM on the affected machine (for example, from the Start menu)?

2. Is PowerShell 7 installed locally, and if so, is it installed for all users?

3. Can PowerShell 7 be launched successfully outside of RDM?

4. If you create a new PowerShell Terminal (Local) entry in RDM (rather than using an existing entry created prior to the update), does the behavior change?

5. When the terminal closes, do you see any relevant messages in:

6. the entry logs for the PowerShell terminal entry

7. the Devolutions Server data source logs

8. or the Windows Event Viewer (Application or Security logs)?

These checks should help determine the scope of the issue. Based on the results, we can then decide if additional logs are required for further investigation.

Thank you for your patience.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

Thank you for your update. To proceed, we’ll need to collect Profiler logs while the issue is being reproduced, then review them to determine the next steps.

Please start by enabling the Profiler in Remote Desktop Manager and reproduce the issue (attempting multiple RustDesk connections using the same password).

Profiler logs (required – must be running while reproducing the issue)

From the Help menu in RDM:

• Click Profiler from the feature ribbon

• In the Profiler window:

• On the Performance tab, set the Profiler level to 331809

• Enable the Timestamp option

• On the Debug Only tab, set the Debug level to 451

• Keep the Profiler window open (you may slide it to the side)

Next:

• In RDM, hold the CTRL key and click the Refresh icon

• Work as usual and reproduce the issue a few times

• Take note of the approximate time each failure occurs

When finished:

• In the Profiler window, click Send trace to support

• In the next window, click Save to file

• Please attach the saved file to your reply

Additional logs (please include if possible):

• Entry logs: open the affected entry and go to the Logs tab

• Application logs: in RDM, open the Help menu and select Application Logs

These logs should allow us to review the behavior and determine the appropriate next steps. Thank you for your cooperation.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

Thank you for your patience. Just to make sure we’re aligned:

>You are currently using Remote Desktop Manager directly with an Azure SQL data source (without DVLS)?

>Connections work correctly for the first two users

>The third connection consistently fails with a “wrong password” error

>This happens every time

Could you please clarify a couple of remaining points:

1. Are these simultaneous RustDesk connections, or does the issue also occur if the first two sessions are closed before connecting the third?

2. Do all affected connections use the same RustDesk password, or does each user/machine have its own password?

3. Which RDM version was the last one where this worked?

This information can help determine whether this is a regression in recent versions or related to connection/session handling.

Elevate your learning - Join the Devolutions Academy !

Kind regards,

Kelly

Thank you for reporting this issue. What it RDM using as a data source?

Kind regards,

Kelly