SVI/netbird
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird.git synced 2026-07-27 16:32:34 -04:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Users creation in single account mode #705

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-11-20 05:16:15 -05:00 by saavagebueno · 4 comments
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:16:15 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @sisumara on GitHub (Mar 15, 2024).

Describe the problem

I've deployed a self hosted solution with enabled single user mode and Zitadel as IDP. When I create a new user in Zitadel and logging in to Netbird then it creates a new user with owner role every time when I try to login with new user. I've tried to play with --disable-single-account-mode but I've got the same results. How to configure it properly to create users under an owner account?

To Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

Deploy self-hosted solution with Zitadel IDP without using quick deployment script.

Expected behavior

I expected to create another users under the same account (owner) to use common network resources.

Are you using NetBird Cloud?

Self-hosted solution.

NetBird version

netbird 0.26.3

Thank you

Originally created by @sisumara on GitHub (Mar 15, 2024). **Describe the problem** I've deployed a self hosted solution with enabled single user mode and Zitadel as IDP. When I create a new user in Zitadel and logging in to Netbird then it creates a new user with owner role every time when I try to login with new user. I've tried to play with -**-disable-single-account-mode** but I've got the same results. How to configure it properly to create users under an owner account? **To Reproduce** Steps to reproduce the behavior: Deploy self-hosted solution with Zitadel IDP without using quick deployment script. **Expected behavior** I expected to create another users under the same account (owner) to use common network resources. **Are you using NetBird Cloud?** Self-hosted solution. **NetBird version** `netbird 0.26.3` Thank you
saavagebueno added the documentationmanagement-servicequestionself-hosting labels 2025-11-20 05:16:15 -05:00
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:16:15 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mlsmaycon commented on GitHub (Mar 17, 2024):

Hello @sisumara, it seems like that at some point the single account mode was disabled and you end up with more than one account.

The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled.

@mlsmaycon commented on GitHub (Mar 17, 2024): Hello @sisumara, it seems like that at some point the single account mode was disabled and you end up with more than one account. The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled.
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:16:16 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sisumara commented on GitHub (Mar 17, 2024):

Hello @sisumara, it seems like that at some point the single account mode was disabled and you end up with more than one account.

The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled.

It works. Thank you for help!

@sisumara commented on GitHub (Mar 17, 2024): > Hello @sisumara, it seems like that at some point the single account mode was disabled and you end up with more than one account. > > The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled. It works. Thank you for help!
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:16:16 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@sircthulhu commented on GitHub (Jun 6, 2024):

Thank you, it helped me too :)

It would be great to have these steps in docs troubleshooting section

@sircthulhu commented on GitHub (Jun 6, 2024): Thank you, it helped me too :) It would be great to have these steps in docs troubleshooting section
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:16:16 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2025):

noting down to add a revised version to the documentation:

The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled.

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2025): noting down to add a revised version to the documentation: > The best way to fix this now is to clean the installation, but if you have some peers running, that might not be optimal, so in that case, the best is to login with each user and delete their account in the Settings menu > Danger zone, once that is done, restart the management service and check the logs to confirm that single mode is enabled.
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 documentation management-service question self-hosting
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#705
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?