SVI/netbird
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird.git synced 2026-06-14 03:11:57 -04:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

feature: automatic user group / wildcard ACL #182

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-11-20 05:07:35 -05:00 by saavagebueno · 4 comments
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:07:35 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @diegocn on GitHub (Sep 8, 2022).

Hello. This is a feature request for netbird’s team.

As a regular user, I want all devices I add to the network to be peers within “my own group”.

As an admin, I would like to have an ACL that allows all devices added by users would be part of their own group by default, and then, all their devices would be peers.

Idea:

  • all users will automatically have their own group/tag created upon first login within the organization
  • all their devices will be part of this group/tag by default
  • an ACL rule could set this behavior by defining a “special/wildcard” group called “@user_group” (or other better naming) that will be evaluated as each user’s own group automatically

Related to: https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/issues/457

Originally created by @diegocn on GitHub (Sep 8, 2022). Hello. This is a feature request for netbird’s team. As a regular user, I want all devices I add to the network to be peers within “my own group”. As an admin, I would like to have an ACL that allows all devices added by users would be part of their own group by default, and then, all their devices would be peers. Idea: - all users will automatically have their own group/tag created upon first login within the organization - all their devices will be part of this group/tag by default - an ACL rule could set this behavior by defining a “special/wildcard” group called “@user_group” (or other better naming) that will be evaluated as each user’s own group automatically Related to: https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/issues/457
saavagebueno added the feature-requestwaiting-feedback labels 2025-11-20 05:07:35 -05:00
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:07:36 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mlsmaycon commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2022):

Thanks, @diegocn, they are really good suggestions and we will be considering them for the next enhancements

@mlsmaycon commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2022): Thanks, @diegocn, they are really good suggestions and we will be considering them for the next enhancements
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:07:36 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Apr 16, 2025):

As an admin, I would like to have an ACL that allows all devices added by users would be part of their own group by default, and then, all their devices would be peers.

all their devices will be part of this group/tag by default

Those 2 are covered

all users will automatically have their own group/tag created upon first login within the organization

I'm pretty sure this is covered by IdP Sync feature

an ACL rule could set this behavior by defining a “special/wildcard” group called “@user_group” (or other better naming) that will be evaluated as each user’s own group automatically

Looks like the last thing not already covered in latest versions.
@diegocn sounds like you want a username-derived group creation? I think this has low chance of happening (the usernames aren't very stable across IdP integrations), but can keep the feature request opened for now.

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Apr 16, 2025): > As an admin, I would like to have an ACL that allows all devices added by users would be part of their own group by default, and then, all their devices would be peers. > all their devices will be part of this group/tag by default Those 2 are covered > all users will automatically have their own group/tag created upon first login within the organization I'm pretty sure this is covered by IdP Sync feature > an ACL rule could set this behavior by defining a “special/wildcard” group called “@user_group” (or other better naming) that will be evaluated as each user’s own group automatically Looks like the last thing not already covered in latest versions. @diegocn sounds like you want a username-derived group creation? I think this has low chance of happening (the usernames aren't very stable across IdP integrations), but can keep the feature request opened for now.
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:07:37 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@diegocn commented on GitHub (May 10, 2025):

Hi @nazarewk

The idea is not to rely on user’s name itself, but on the identity. So, a single identity would have this “self” group, and the peers added using this same identity would be automatically part of this “self” group.

For example: I first login using my laptop, then login using my smartphone using the same identity for both, so, both peers (devices) would be able to see each other automatically.

@diegocn commented on GitHub (May 10, 2025): Hi @nazarewk The idea is not to rely on user’s name itself, but on the identity. So, a single identity would have this “self” group, and the peers added using this same identity would be automatically part of this “self” group. For example: I first login using my laptop, then login using my smartphone using the same identity for both, so, both peers (devices) would be able to see each other automatically.
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:07:37 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Lochnair commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2025):

Just want to add that this is the missing feature for me to be able to move to NetBird from Tailscale.

Currently I have in my Tailscale policy:

{
	"src": ["autogroup:member"],
	"dst": ["autogroup:self"],
	"ip":  ["*"],
},

This lets me, and other members of my network do as @diegocn describes and reach all of our own devices tied to our identities automatically without adding them to any specific group.

The closest you can get today I guess, is use the API with a script running at regular intervals to automatically create/update groups and policies, should work, but it's not exactly ideal.

@Lochnair commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2025): Just want to add that this is the missing feature for me to be able to move to NetBird from Tailscale. Currently I have in my Tailscale policy: ```json { "src": ["autogroup:member"], "dst": ["autogroup:self"], "ip": ["*"], }, ``` This lets me, and other members of my network do as @diegocn describes and reach all of our own devices tied to our identities automatically without adding them to any specific group. The closest you can get today I guess, is use the API with a script running at regular intervals to automatically create/update groups and policies, should work, but it's not exactly ideal.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
2021 Q4
2022 Q1
2022 Q1
accessibility
acl
agent
agent
Android
Android
api
authentik
automation
azure
battery-usage
bug
cache
client
client-ui
cloud
cloud-only
cloudflare
community
compatibility
config-idp
config-issue
connection
contribution
coturn
cross-vpn
dashboard
data-usage
distribution
dns
docker
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
enhancement
event-stream
feature-request
freebsd
getting-started
go
good first issue
gui
help wanted
home-assistant
idp
inconsistency
integration
integrations
ios
ipv6
jwt
k8s
keycloak
linux
login
macos
management-service
missing-docs
mobile
moved-internal
needs-review
netbird-ui
networking
new-platform
nginx
notification
okta
openwrt
packaging
peer-management
peer-management
peer-management
performance
postgres
posture-checks
psk
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
refactor
relay
release
rfc
routes
security
security-related
self-hosting
server
signal
sleep-issue
ssh
ssl
status
store
synology
system-compatibility-issue
test-suite
third-party-integration
triage
triage-needed
troubleshooting
UX
waiting-feedback
windows
wontfix
zitadel
No Label feature-request waiting-feedback
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
saavagebueno
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: SVI/netbird#182
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?