Allow configuring custom Authentication header

[ThomasOrlita]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Portainer uses the Authentication header for the JWT token. This might be fine for most users, but causes issues for everyone who wants to use Basic Auth. See #2809 and #3893.

Describe the solution you'd like
Allow users to configure custom Authentication header name in a config / environmental variable. If the custom value is not set, keep using the original Authentication name.

See #3893 (comment) for more info

Describe alternatives you've considered
Not using Basic Auth and using an unguessable path (#2809 (comment)), which is not a proper alternative.

Additional context

• #2809 fix(authentication): change jwt header name #2815
• Proxy BasicAuth not compatible with Portainer default authentication #3893 (comment)

Implementing this will allow users who wish to set up a second authorization at a different level to increase the security of the exposed web admin interface, and will have no effect on all other users.

[valentinp72]

Any news on this ? It seems to be such a simple thing to implement, as #2815 already implemented most of it.

[ThomasOrlita]

@jamescarppe why did this get closed as an issue/request and converted to a discussion? Is Portainer planning to fix this?

[jamescarppe]

We're moving to using discussions for questions and feature requests going forward and keeping issues for bug reports exclusively. This lets us gauge community feedback easier and facilitates wider discussion on ideas and implementation. The feature request is still open - nothing changes there.

[runekaagaard]

I agree it's pretty inconvinient, basic auth prevents a lot of the multitude of attack vectors a web-app can have. That being said, I guess one could get a lot of the same benefits by using mTLS certificates.

[jrabbit]

For real this is a major blocker -- I am sick of CNCF corporate pompousness poisoning every project