How do I merge duplicate entries in 1Password?



  • Hi
    In Google Contacts, there is a function to merge items that seem to refer to the same contact. If "Merge" is selected, it sticks all the data together. I would be very happy with a simple solution like this: stick it all together, then I can choose which data to keep.

    I have a lot of apparent duplicates, because at one time I was using Roboform and then paralleled it with 1 password for a while then just Roboform. Now that I've decided to just use 1 password, and I've imported all the Roboform data, I ahve loads of partial duplicates and the ability to merge would really make the sorting out easier.

    I sincerely hope that this is not a big ask. Whatever Google can do, I'm sure you guys can do too! :)


  • brentybrenty

    Team Member

    Contacts are simple because they all share the same format and are not encrypted. And Google has a lot of resources to throw at just about anything. But perhaps we'll be able to have 1Password do more to help people clean up their data in the future. It's just got to compete with all of the other features/improvements that require work.

  • olivaoliva
    edited December 2019

    @brenty I searched for this issue now and found a separate thread in which I commented before. That thread was closed in favor of this one.

    I mean this to be constructive.

    First, you have shown a lot of patience in these threads, but also a lack of flexibility. Are you the ultimate decision-maker here? I - and I think many here - believe this needs to be escalated.

    Second, here is what I submit as a very simple solution in the hopes that you won't be able to shoot it down... (note that I'm referencing the Mac OS version, but the same idea applies to all, I would think)

    1. On each item, there is an "Edit" button at bottom. Next to this button add a button that says, "Select Values to Copy"
    2. When the user clicks this "select values" button, display the ubiquitous pattern of checkboxes next to all values and remove the "select values" button and replace it with butttons for "copy" and "cancel".
    3. The checkboxes can be clicked at the entire item level at top (selecting/unselecting all below), at a particular item or section, etc. The point is that the user is explicitly selecting the items he or she intends to copy. The user finishes making selections and clicks "copy". You somehow keep track of what was 'copied' - this is an implementation detail, we don't need to know about.
    4. The user navigates to another item. Since there are values "copied", you show a "Paste Copied Values" button next to that item's "Edit" button. You paste all of the values. When a section or item has a duplicate name, if that's a problem, you can ad a number next to it... or whatever.

    The user here would be deciding everything explicitly. The user would go back and delete the item copied from if desired, etc. You might also add a "Paste And Remove From Previous" button or a checkbox next to paste to "Remove From Previous". You also probably need a "Cancel Copy" button somewhere.

    Once a user has all values in the same item, remaining curation, de-dup, etc. is simple.

    If other users agree that this simplifies our curation of our vaults - which we desperately need help with - is there any logical or technical reason why this design can't be implemented?

  • LarsLars Junior Member

    Team Member

    Hey, @oliva! Happy New Year. :) Nothing nefarious in regard to the other thread; older threads here get closed automatically after a while, because we want to avoid someone Googling (or using our built-in search) to find an issue that's eighteen months or three years old, which references versions of browsers and 1Password that are significantly out of date, and bringing it back to the front page by commenting. Sometimes those older threads contain instructions or at least issues that remain relevant, but frequently what was good advice/ideas for older threads like that can range anywhere from irrelevant to potentially unwise due to changes in OSes, extensions and 1Password itself.

    Regarding the issue of a merge tool, it's not a question of logical or technical reasons why this can't be implemented, it's a question of resources, complexity of the issue, and available developer cycles. In other words: priorities. Doing this means other issues, feature-requests, etc, don't get done, and vice-versa. Right now, there are simply other priorities which have gotten our development attention. That doesn't mean we don't think a revamped merge tool wouldn't be a benefit for some users, it just means it remains - for now - in the "someday" stack, that's all.

  • olivaoliva
    edited January 1

    Thanks. I didn’t mean to suggest anything nefarious. I was trying to note that it’s a recurring frustration.

    Note: This “someday” explanation of yours is very different than the “it can’t be logically done” answers I was given before.

    I understand what you now describe to mean the pain of paying customers is not as important to you as... well, something else. “Someday” is not good customer service.

    I like your app and would have preferred to keep using it. I’m going to jump ship and change my recommendation to my clients. Anyone that uses your app long enough ends up with garbage. I have anywhere from 3 to 6 duplicates of way too many entries and have to fish for the right value when time is short. Maybe “someday” I’ll have the time to have one “manual merge maintenance” day per month, but I’d rather spend that time doing something else.

  • LarsLars Junior Member

    Team Member

    @oliva - sounds good. Stay safe out there.

  • @Lars I don’t mean to continue the tone this thread is taking. I’ve been using 1Password for years, and I expect to continue for years into the future. I think users here are upset because they take your responses to be dismissive; I don’t feel that way.

    It’s one thing to say there will never be enough developer cycles to tackle every complex problem — that’s obviously true enough. On the other hand, how many cycles have already been spent to provide 1Password’s reused password warnings — features that are currently mostly useless, because they constantly flag duplicated logins that I can’t figure out how to resolve on my own?

    Giving 1Password users a meaningful way to stop team (family) members from reusing passwords is a killer feature. But right now, when I Google “1Password reused,” the autocomplete offerings include “1Password disable reused password warning” — and if you’re committed to helping customers combat this problem, I’d think that alone would cause more concern than the issues in your ”’someday’ stack.”

    As a fan and committed customer, I hope you’re understating where this issue ranks among your priorities.

  • @lars thanks... Just gave you 2 stars on the Apple App Store... you stay safe out there, too.

    Unlike mgrad92, I do think you guys are dismissive of real problems with the usability of the app, or rather, you don’t see feedback of users like me as important. That’s not a good sign of healthy diversity of thinking. You make your business decisions, and I’ll make mine. I’ll drop off now. Good luck everyone.

  • LarsLars Junior Member

    Team Member

    @mgrad92 - thanks for your thoughts on these two issues, as well as the kind words. You're right, when we say something's not being worked on currently but is still on our radar screen, it's not intended to be dismissive. It just means we can't work on everything at once, so decisions get made about what should be priorities in terms of what gets worked on.

    We've got a much tinier list of features/requests which we've considered carefully and concluded we'll never do (for various reasons) than I suspect many people imagine -- things like allowing no Master Password or one/two character Master Passwords. There are indeed such things -- but when someone asks about one of those, we will be honest and say we don't plan on doing those, and give a summary of our reasoning. Everything else falls somewhere on the priority spectrum, which is a relatively complicated and ever-changing thing: what else do we have on our plates? Are there browser or OS changes that require work that isn't specifically a feature request or improvement? What issues affect the most people? What would benefit the greatest number of users? What's most-requested? Are there security concerns? How much work would each specific feature require, relative to its affect on users? Everything - literally, everything - outside of that small group of items that we've determined for one reason or another we're just not going to pursue - goes onto that priority list. Sometimes, as is the case with the Reused Passwords feature, there are other things internally that must happen before we're able to address it in the way we'd like to be able to -- in this case, as a cross-platform, server-based feature instead of an Apple-only, app-based flag or tag or checkbox to suppress warnings.

    Both that issue and the one that was the original subject of this thread, merging duplicate entries, are issues we definitely can see possibilities (and benefits to some users) in pursuing. We definitely hear you -- all of you who are generous enough to take the time to share your thoughts/ideas/requests with us here or via email -- and we're grateful for your passion for 1Password and take your feedback and wishes into account. We appreciate your patience and look forward to surprising and delighting 1Password users for years to come. :)

  • @Lars: “… There are other things internally that must happen before we're able to address it in the way we'd like to be able to -- in this case, as a cross-platform, server-based feature instead of an Apple-only, app-based flag or tag or checkbox to suppress warnings.” (Emphasis mine.)

    This makes a lot of sense, and it's something I hadn't considered. I have a 1Password account these days, obviously, but I admit I still default to thinking of the application the same way I did when all data was local and I was syncing 1Password via Dropbox. I understand why you'd want to address these issues on the server side, tho', and accomplishing that without any visibility into PI data is an intriguing problem.

    Personally, I like the fact that 1Password doesn't let you turn off warnings about resused passwords, etc. (I even like that it warns about passwords reused in vaults I don't include in my All Vaults view.) I look forward to the day when all the false alarms can be eliminated — and I'm relieved to hear that your team's "'someday' stack" doesn't work the way mine does (as a repository for tasks I know I'll never even begin but important enough that I'd feel guilty about deleting them). :)

  • LarsLars Junior Member

    Team Member

    @mgrad92 - yep. We try to keep the list of "won't do" as short as possible because quite frankly, the landscape is always changing and what would've been prohibitive in terms of resources vs value gained or maybe even unwise from a security standpoint yesterday might become entirely reasonable today...or tomorrow. More than anything, we try to be as transparent and straightforward as possible about our own thinking on various issues, within the limitations of not pre-announcing release dates for new features or other improvements, as many factors (some beyond our control) affect them.

  • After reading this intriguing thread I have zero hope that "someday" will actually come, but I just wanted to raise another hand to say "please, please consider building a form of merging feature".

    For clarity, I run a software company so fully appreciate the backlog priority, and how much more complex this is technically than it would appear on the surface.

    I agree that avoiding data loss is a key priority. However, I'm also very confident some clever UX and UI could go a long way here to stop people tearing their hair out.

    But most of all, I'm just raising another hand to say there's still a lot of us out here who really want this feature (to the point where it's making me question a refund and jumping ship, even though otherwise I loved the tool before it became a chaotic mess of duplicates).

  • LarsLars Junior Member

    Team Member

    Welcome to the forum, @nyeeles! Thanks for joining the conversation, as well as for realizing and stating what we realized some time ago when giving this serious consideration -- that adding this feature in a way that carefully takes into account potential for data loss and the misuse which can lead to it, is neither a quick nor easy thing.

    Duplicated entries are a problem for a small-ish subset of users, for sure. Often those who've transitioned in from previous standalone setups, or who (perhaps inadvertently) merged two separate datasets from a previously-shared Dropbox sync keychain or the like. This thread serves as evidence that this sort of issue does indeed occur, no question. As you note, however, it's a matter of priority, time and effort needed for result achieved, and the galaxy of other factors that go into that. There are always more things on our own wishlist - let alone what we receive from users - than we have time to pursue comprehensively enough to turn into real features in 1Password. We've gotten requests over the years to develop a full-fledged SSH agent and integrate it into 1Password as well, for example. We've no doubt whatsoever that the people advocating passionately for this or that feature would themselves benefit substantially from it -- but, as it sounds like you already know well if you run a software outfit, you can't drive every car at once. And even if you had the resources to do so, it wouldn't necessarily be a good idea for your apps or services to load them up with every feature request you receive.

    For this one, once more, I can say that we do indeed see the value in it, and we are not closing the door on it, not at all. It just doesn't exist currently, and while we appreciate the passionate appeals for it, I don't have anything to promise in terms of commitment to when it might get done.

    There are often - usually, even, though it depends greatly on individual setup and history of use - ways to restore from earlier versions or merge data selectively by determining when two previously-identical datasets began diverging, and import only that which was altered after a certain date, etc. We help users with these types of issues regularly, and are happy to do so for anyone who wants/needs the assistance. The best way to get in touch with us for help with a specific set of data is via email (rather than trying to conduct troubleshooting details of specific private setups here in this public forum) at [email protected] It's also worth noting that this kind of data-duplication issue is part of the reason memberships exist: because they're almost entirely a thing of the past once a user is a member. Between individual item history and seamless sync across all devices, mostly-but-not-quite-identical datasets that diverge and then get merged accidentally just aren't a problem with accounts.

    If you're having specific issues with either your own or an employee's data, please reach out to us at [email protected] - we're here to help! :) Thanks again for adding your voice to this thread.

  • I'd like to +1 for this feature. I do thing merging requires a bit of thought, but I strongly believe you can start with simple solutions here. You already have the notion of multiple passwords for a given item and timestamps attached to each. This alone would be a great start.

    I've used 1password for years, and what happens is you start accumulating multiple entries pretty easily. All those slightly different URLs for a given site are a major culprit here. From reading this forum a lot of the thought from the 1password team is talking about merging vaults, yet I have 17 entries for Facebook with only ever having 1 vault. The same login and passwords will be repeated for almost all of them. It's difficult for me to imagine any heavy user over the years not coming into the same problem. I don't believe this is niche, and this thread has been active for 4 years now. At some point I'd like to think this would be prioritized. With all the competition in password managers, I'd hope you guys would be putting in the effort to make the core product strong. Effective management of your passwords is such a way if you still care about the consumer space instead of going for the Lastpass-style enterprise sales.

This discussion has been closed.