Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm.git synced 2026-07-19 22:23:50 -04:00
Code Issues 328 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #2314] [BUG]: Basic Auth behind a reverse proxy is broken #1512

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-22 18:25:12 -05:00 by yindo · 3 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-22 18:25:12 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @Danoloan10 on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm/issues/2314

How are you running AnythingLLM?

Docker (remote machine)

What happened?

When deploying A-LLM behind a reverse proxy and configuring Básica Auth in the proxy, the app keeps rewriting the Authorization header to null, thus spamming the credentials popup and rendering the app unusable.

Are there known steps to reproduce?

Deploy a reverse proxy configuration (for example, using nginx) and configure Basic Auth in the A-LLM endpoint).

Originally created by @Danoloan10 on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm/issues/2314 ### How are you running AnythingLLM? Docker (remote machine) ### What happened? When deploying A-LLM behind a reverse proxy and configuring Básica Auth in the proxy, the app keeps rewriting the Authorization header to null, thus spamming the credentials popup and rendering the app unusable. ### Are there known steps to reproduce? Deploy a reverse proxy configuration (for example, using nginx) and configure Basic Auth in the A-LLM endpoint).
yindo added the possible bug label 2026-02-22 18:25:12 -05:00
yindo closed this issue 2026-02-22 18:25:12 -05:00
yindo commented 2026-02-22 18:25:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@Danoloan10 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024):

I'm trying to fix it in my fork for my personal deployment. Sucks bc it's much harder to use docker for a fork.

@Danoloan10 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024): I'm trying to fix it in my fork for my personal deployment. Sucks bc it's much harder to use docker for a fork.
yindo commented 2026-02-22 18:25:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@timothycarambat commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024):

This is not supported explicitly by the software, we use the Authorization header for our own auth system for single and multi-user and co-opting it will be something that will cause issues if you are trying to protect the app via Basic Auth.

Is there any reason the default built in auth system that used JWT will not suffice here? Otherwise this is out of scope for this use case

@timothycarambat commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024): This is not supported explicitly by the software, we use the `Authorization` header for our own auth system for single and multi-user and co-opting it will be something that will cause issues if you are trying to protect the app via Basic Auth. Is there any reason the default built in auth system that used JWT will not suffice here? Otherwise this is out of scope for this use case
yindo commented 2026-02-22 18:25:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@Danoloan10 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024):

I'll look into using JWT. I just wanted to put basic auth in the reverse proxy because I don't have any authentication service deployed in my domain, but I still want to (somewhat) protect the endpoint from the public. I just was wondering why the Authorization header must be overwritten to null, it seemed avoidable. Thanks for the response.

@Danoloan10 commented on GitHub (Sep 18, 2024): I'll look into using JWT. I just wanted to put basic auth in the reverse proxy because I don't have any authentication service deployed in my domain, but I still want to (somewhat) protect the endpoint from the public. I just was wondering why the Authorization header must be overwritten to null, it seemed avoidable. Thanks for the response.
yindo changed title from [BUG]: Basic Auth behind a reverse proxy is broken to [GH-ISSUE #2314] [BUG]: Basic Auth behind a reverse proxy is broken 2026-06-05 14:41:10 -04:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
Desktop
Docker
Integration Request
Integration Request
OS: Linux
OS: Mobile
OS: Windows
UI/UX
blocked
bug
bug
core-team-only
documentation
duplicate
embed-widget
enhancement
feature request
github_actions
good first issue
investigating
needs info / can't replicate
possible bug
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
stage: specifications
wontfix
No Label possible bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
yindo
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm#1512
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?