Level up your business security with free, on-demand training and certification. Explore 1Password Academy today →
SSH Agent should support host-to-key mapping to avoid MaxAuthTries exhaustion
The 1Password SSH agent currently offers all keys in the vault sequentially for every SSH connection, regardless of which key is relevant to the target host. This triggers an error for a number of hosts: Too many authentication failures Servers configured with MaxAuthTries below the number of SSH certs on in 1Password run the risk of being unreachable thanks to the way that the agent presents the keys. Best practice (https://linuxize.com/post/ssh-hardening-best-practices/) suggests 3-4 for the setting, and according to the man page for sshd indicates that the default is 6 (https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/418582/in-sshd-config-maxauthtries-limits-the-number-of-auth-failures-per-connection) To reproduce: Have 6+ SSH keys in your 1Password vault Connect to a server with MaxAuthTries 3 (or default) configured The correct key in vault order is greater in count to the setting on the host Result: Received disconnect from [host]: Too many authentication failures Evidence from verbose SSH output: debug1: Offering public key: GitHub ED25519 ... agent debug1: Offering public key: GitLab ED25519 ... agent debug1: Offering public key: K8sFrontEnd ED25519 ... agent Received disconnect: Too many authentication failures The correct key (4th in vault) was never reached since the MaxAuthRetry was set to 3. Workaround: Save the relevant public key to disk and use IdentitiesOnly yes + IdentityFile in ~/.ssh/config to pin a specific key to a host. This works but defeats much of the convenience of the agent. Feature request(if the devs are looking here): Allow users to associate a key with one or more hostnames directly in the 1Password vault item or SSH Agent UI. The Bookmarks tab suggests this infrastructure may already be in progress. If bookmarked hosts could drive key selection, that would solve this entirely. This is a natural extension of what 1Password already does well: matching credentials to their intended destination.New getting-started guides, AI search, and LLM-ready docs for 1Password dev tools at 1password.dev
Hi everyone! We've been investing in making 1Password's developer documentation genuinely useful from the first click, and we wanted to share what's now live over at 1password.dev. 📖 New getting-started guides We've published workflow-based getting-started guides across every major tool area: SSH & Git, 1Password CLI, SDKs (Go, JavaScript, Python), Environments, integrations, and more. Instead of jumping between reference pages, you can follow a clear path from setup to working integration, organized around how you actually build. 🔍 AI-powered search across the docs You can hit Ctrl+K on any page and ask a question in plain language. The built-in AI assistant searches the full documentation set and gives you a direct answer with links to the relevant pages. It’s a much faster way to find what you need, especially if you’re not sure which tool or section to look in. Try it: open 1password.dev, hit ⌘+K, and type “How do I set up git commit signing with multiple GitHub accounts?” 🤖 Docs built for AI dev workflows If you use AI coding assistants like Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, or Claude, our docs are now natively consumable. Every page is available as Markdown (append .md to any URL), and we serve llms.txt and llms-full.txt at the site root so your tools can reference 1Password docs directly. Details here: Build with LLMs 🏗️ Refreshed docs structure The documentation is now organized around the way developers work, with clearer navigation across SSH & Git, CLI, SDKs, Environments, secrets management, and integrations. If you've found our docs hard to navigate in the past, it's worth another look. 📌 One practical note: our developer docs now live at 1password.dev. All your existing developer.1password.com links and bookmarks redirect automatically, so nothing breaks. We'd love your feedback If you run into any issues or have suggestions, let us know in this thread. You can also reach us in the 1Password Developers Slack. Happy building! 🔐
Linux beta breaks git signing - removes execute bit on op-ssh-sign
I ran into an error today after updating the Linux client from stable to the latest beta. When I went to commit git chang.s the commit failed with this error: fatal: cannot exec '/opt/1Password/op-ssh-sign': Permission denied error: fatal: failed to write commit object Someone in their great wisdom broke 1Password by removing permissions. The file permissions change from working: .rwxr-xr-x@ 3.9M root root 20 Apr 22:22 onepassword-mcp .rwxr-xr-x@ 1.5M root root 20 Apr 22:22 op-ssh-sign To whatever something thought this is going to do: .rw-r-Sr--@ 3.8M root onepassword-mcp 14 May 04:24 onepassword-mcp .rw-r--r--@ 1.5M root root 14 May 04:24 op-ssh-sign Please fix the file permissions for the git signing functionality.
Feature Request: Can we get a gh auth login style flow for the CLI?
Hi 1Password team, I’m hitting a major wall with the CLI when trying to use it with AI coding agents (like Claude Code, Cursor, or Linear Agents). Right now, op seems to assume that the person running the "op run" command is always sitting right there at a TTY with a keyboard. But when I’m running an agent in a headless container or a remote environment, the CLI just hangs because it’s waiting for a password or a biometric prompt that it can’t reach. I really don't want to use Service Accounts for this. Giving an autonomous agent a long-lived, static token feels like a massive security step backward. I want the agent to be able to "ask" me for permission. What I'm looking for: A way to do something like op login --browser. It would give me a URL/code (exactly like how aws sso login or the GitHub CLI works), I click it on my host machine, auth in my browser with TouchID, and the agent gets its session token. Are there any plans to support an OIDC-style "Device Authorization" flow?
SSH config managed from 1Password - alternative to SSH Bookmarks
(Mods: feel free to remove this if it's not appropriate here) I gave SSH Bookmarks a try but found it didn't quite cover my needs. No password/OTP auth, no way to use arbitrary SSH directives, no per-machine filtering, ... So I ended up building a small OSS tool called ssh-concierge that takes a similar approach but goes a bit further: it treats 1Password as the single source of truth for your entire SSH config, not just key-to-host mapping. In case it's useful to anyone else: https://github.com/bedezign/ssh-concierge Happy to answer questions!op.exe considered harmful?
I’d like to raise a point about the current security model of op.exe, and how it affects protection against supply-chain or similar attacks. Consider a scenario where an attacker manages to execute malicious code locally, for example, via a compromised Python package. While this is often considered “game over,” in practice we still want to avoid being the easiest target in such situations. A common behavior of malicious payloads is to harvest local secrets. While 1Password provides some protection against direct file access, an attacker can simply invoke op.exe, which actually centralizes access to clear-text secrets in a very convenient way. Although op.exe prompts the user for permission, my understanding is that this permission applies broadly (e.g., to the entire account for a period such as 10 minutes). As a user, I can see which application is requesting access, but not which vaults or items are being queried. In practice, the application name (e.g., WindowsTerminal) is not very helpful in determining whether the request is legitimate. I’d be interested in others’ perspectives on this. Some potential improvements that seem valuable to me: When requesting permission, op.exe should provide more context (e.g., which vaults and items are being accessed). Users should be able to grant permissions at a finer granularity: not just account-wide, but limited to specific vaults or even individual items. Another useful feature would be the ability to mark certain items or vaults as excluded from programmatic access (via op.exe, and possibly browser extensions). Even better, this could be the default behavior, requiring explicit opt-in at the item level. I understand that such restrictions would be enforced client-side and therefore not fully robust. However, they would still meaningfully increase the effort required for a malicious local process to enumerate and exfiltrate secrets, and thus provide practical security benefits. Finally, it might be worth considering stronger protections at the vault level—for example, requiring explicit user authentication (master password, or even a separate password) before allowing access to secrets. This could apply not only to op.exe, but also to the interactive 1Password client.I would like EPM with my SOC workflow for Oauth. Looking forward to SCIM improvements for SecOps.
Didn't understand half of what the blog post went over b/c i had to remember so many acronymns. https://1password.com/blog/automating-soc-workflows-with-1password-enterprise-password-manager Look at what is happening in society. People are live streaming implementations of openclaw and exposing their tokens. OPENCLAW DEMO THAT YOU NEED TO WATCH. I TIMESTAMPED IT SO U GO TO GOOD PARTUsing a Service Account token to grant a connect server acces to a vault
Hey. I'm using a service account token in a GitLab CI/CD pipeline, where I first install the 1Password CLI. It works great when i create a vault and give permissions to some groups on that vault. I would like to use the command "op connect vault grant" to give our Connect Server access to that newly created vault, so that I can subsequently use our Connect Server and do operations on that newly created vault. However I am encountering the following error: $ op connect vault grant --server OUR-SERVER --vault "VAULT_NAME" [ERROR] 2026/02/18 16:35:30 There are 0 servers that match {"OUR-SERVER"}. Try again and specify the servers's UUID instead. This is a bit weird since I can type in that command locally, using 1password CLI, and it works great. I suspect that Service Account tokens cannot grant vault permissions to Connect servers, but i'd like to be sure. If it is the case, what alternative could be used to obtain the same behaviour ? The goal here is obviously to not have to do anything manually, and it is still secure since all our credentials and secrets are stored in Gitlab CI/CD variables. Thanks Edit: I also tried with the server ID instead of its name, but same result. Edit2: It is not possible, there is an "Unsupported commands" small blue paragraph in this documentation that I missed: https://developer.1password.com/docs/service-accounts/use-with-1password-cli/#supported-commands
