Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[REQUEST] Support Multiple API Keys for Inference #79

Open
strikeoncmputrz opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #190
Open

[REQUEST] Support Multiple API Keys for Inference #79

strikeoncmputrz opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #190
Labels
enhancement New feature or request low priority Good issue, but isn't necessary to add right away

Comments

@strikeoncmputrz
Copy link

First, thank you for the awesome tool!

Describe the solution you'd like
I would like to enable a small number of users to directly use the chat and chat/completions endpoints and provide each a different API key for access control and monitoring. "Share these keys with guests to your API." implies that this is possible but I couldn't make additional keys or find other references to multiple keys in the documentation.

Describe alternatives you've considered
I tried to add multiple API keys but tabbyAPI only appears to allow the last one in the list to authenticate. Other keys were invalid. I've also considered proxying the traffic through nginx but this would add unnecessary complexity.

Why should this feature be added?
This would enable tabbyAPI to support multiple users with per-key access. It could also pave the way for additional role-based access control.

Examples
User 1 submits inference requests. User 2 submits 10x more inference requests. The admin is able to easily identify this based on different API keys.

@bdashore3 bdashore3 added enhancement New feature or request low priority Good issue, but isn't necessary to add right away labels Mar 17, 2024
kir-gadjello added a commit to kir-gadjello/tabbyAPI that referenced this issue May 1, 2024
@SecretiveShell SecretiveShell linked a pull request Sep 6, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request low priority Good issue, but isn't necessary to add right away
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants