starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Enable custom fields for secrets #1425

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:32:07 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:32:07 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @evantheenginr on GitHub (Nov 28, 2017).

Issue type

[X] Feature request
[ ] Bug report
[ ] Documentation

Environment

  • Python version: 3.4.5
  • NetBox version: 2.2.6

Many of our secrets involve the use of additional information in order to authenticate with a device or service on a device. This is non-sensitive information related to the secret. It might be a connection endpoint for a service such as https://host:port/service or a information about a 2FA mechanism. In extreme cases we may make notes about use or purpose of access related to a secret.

We envision this could be accomplished any number of ways, the most flexible of which would be custom fields for secrets. The addition of 2 fields, one for connection information and one for connection notes would help.

Originally created by @evantheenginr on GitHub (Nov 28, 2017). <!-- Before opening a new issue, please search through the existing issues to see if your topic has already been addressed. Note that you may need to remove the "is:open" filter from the search bar to include closed issues. Check the appropriate type for your issue below by placing an x between the brackets. For assistance with installation issues, or for any other issues other than those listed below, please raise your topic for discussion on our mailing list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss Please note that issues which do not fall under any of the below categories will be closed. Due to an excessive backlog of feature requests, we are not currently accepting any proposals which extend NetBox's feature scope. Do not prepend any sort of tag to your issue's title. An administrator will review your issue and assign labels as appropriate. ---> ### Issue type [X] Feature request <!-- An enhancement of existing functionality --> [ ] Bug report <!-- Unexpected or erroneous behavior --> [ ] Documentation <!-- A modification to the documentation --> <!-- Please describe the environment in which you are running NetBox. (Be sure to verify that you are running the latest stable release of NetBox before submitting a bug report.) If you are submitting a bug report and have made any changes to the code base, please first validate that your bug can be recreated while running an official release. --> ### Environment * Python version: 3.4.5 * NetBox version: 2.2.6 <!-- BUG REPORTS must include: * A list of the steps needed for someone else to reproduce the bug * A description of the expected and observed behavior * Any relevant error messages (screenshots may also help) FEATURE REQUESTS must include: * A detailed description of the proposed functionality * A use case for the new feature * A rough description of any necessary changes to the database schema * Any relevant third-party libraries which would be needed --> Many of our secrets involve the use of additional information in order to authenticate with a device or service on a device. This is non-sensitive information related to the secret. It might be a connection endpoint for a service such as https://host:port/service or a information about a 2FA mechanism. In extreme cases we may make notes about use or purpose of access related to a secret. We envision this could be accomplished any number of ways, the most flexible of which would be custom fields for secrets. The addition of 2 fields, one for connection information and one for connection notes would help.
adam added the status: acceptedtype: feature labels 2025-12-29 16:32:07 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:32:07 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:32:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 29, 2017):

The secret model is intended solely to hold sensitive data. Services and other ancillary data should be modeled elsewhere (in fact, there is a service model specifically for this). Could you explain exactly what it is you're trying to do?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 29, 2017): The secret model is intended solely to hold sensitive data. Services and other ancillary data should be modeled elsewhere (in fact, there is a service model specifically for this). Could you explain exactly what it is you're trying to do?
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:32:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@evantheenginr commented on GitHub (Nov 29, 2017):

There are commonly other pieces of information hat are required in order to use a secret. Specific examples follow:

  1. Multiple instances of software such as MS SQL Server installed on a single device with different SQL user’s in each instance. We have no way to document which secrets on the device tie to which instances of SQL server on that same device in netbox.

  2. In 2FA scenarios, it is handy to know what apparatus, phone number, email address, etc is to be used to acquire the secondary authentication information.

  3. Some secrets are only valid in certain scenarios on a device — for example against certain services. For example a root account password might be accepted via console but not via SSH. It would be handy to document this in some way — custom fields would go a long way on secrets.

On Nov 29, 2017, at 2:02 PM, Jeremy Stretch notifications@github.com wrote:

The secret model is intended solely to hold sensitive data. Services and other ancillary data should be modeled elsewhere (in fact, there is a service model specifically for this). Could you explain exactly what it is you're trying to do?

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/issues/1739#issuecomment-347961987, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFj-lKwPG4Dha4trZEWDagZ0qfraINV0ks5s7apVgaJpZM4QtxcA.

@evantheenginr commented on GitHub (Nov 29, 2017): There are commonly other pieces of information hat are required in order to use a secret. Specific examples follow: 1. Multiple instances of software such as MS SQL Server installed on a single device with different SQL user’s in each instance. We have no way to document which secrets on the device tie to which instances of SQL server on that same device in netbox. 2. In 2FA scenarios, it is handy to know what apparatus, phone number, email address, etc is to be used to acquire the secondary authentication information. 3. Some secrets are only valid in certain scenarios on a device — for example against certain services. For example a root account password might be accepted via console but not via SSH. It would be handy to document this in some way — custom fields would go a long way on secrets. > On Nov 29, 2017, at 2:02 PM, Jeremy Stretch <notifications@github.com> wrote: > > The secret model is intended solely to hold sensitive data. Services and other ancillary data should be modeled elsewhere (in fact, there is a service model specifically for this). Could you explain exactly what it is you're trying to do? > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox/issues/1739#issuecomment-347961987>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFj-lKwPG4Dha4trZEWDagZ0qfraINV0ks5s7apVgaJpZM4QtxcA>. >
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:32:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 17, 2018):

Changed this to focus on custom fields for secrets, as attempting to add specific fields for connection information sounds like a rabbit hole.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 17, 2018): Changed this to focus on custom fields for secrets, as attempting to add specific fields for connection information sounds like a rabbit hole.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:32:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 17, 2018):

Enabled custom fields for secrets in 0c0799f for the v2.4 release.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 17, 2018): Enabled custom fields for secrets in 0c0799f for the v2.4 release.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label status: accepted type: feature
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#1425
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?