[PM-33981] feat: Add device models and API layer by andrebispo5 · Pull Request #2489 · bitwarden/ios

andrebispo5 · 2026-03-25T17:20:49Z

Depends on: #2488

🎟️ Tracking

https://bitwarden.atlassian.net/browse/PM-33981

📔 Objective

Add device models, API requests, and service methods for fetching device data from the server. This includes:

DeviceResponse and DevicesListResponse API response models
DevicesListRequest and CurrentDeviceRequest API requests
DeviceAPIService extensions for fetching devices
DeviceActivityStatus enum for device activity time ranges
DeviceType extension for device type display names
DeviceListItem domain model for UI consumption

github-actions · 2026-03-25T17:26:48Z

Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Details – 03fa0861-5e61-4320-ab18-19e392d2467f

Great job! No new security vulnerabilities introduced in this pull request

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR introduces the foundational models and API-layer plumbing needed to fetch device information from the server and present it in a UI-friendly format within BitwardenShared.

Changes:

Added new device API requests (DevicesListRequest, CurrentDeviceRequest) and DeviceAPIService methods to fetch device data.
Added new response models (DeviceResponse, DevicesListResponse) for decoding server device payloads.
Added domain/UI supporting types (DeviceActivityStatus, DeviceType display helpers, DeviceListItem).

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 8 out of 8 changed files in this pull request and generated 12 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/Requests/DevicesListRequest.swift	New GET request for listing devices.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/Requests/CurrentDeviceRequest.swift	New GET request for fetching the current device by app identifier.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/DeviceAPIService.swift	Adds service methods to call the new device endpoints.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Response/DevicesListResponse.swift	Adds list response model wrapping `[DeviceResponse]`.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Response/DeviceResponse.swift	Adds per-device API response model.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Enum/DeviceType.swift	Adds `DeviceType` display/category mapping helpers.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Enum/DeviceActivityStatus.swift	Adds device activity bucketing + localized label lookup.
BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Domain/DeviceListItem.swift	Adds UI-friendly device list domain model and mapping from `DeviceResponse`.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:34Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Enum/DeviceType.swift

+        case Self.unknownBrowser:
+            Localizations.unknown
+        case Self.windowsCLI, Self.windowsDesktop:
+            "Windows"
+        case Self.macOsCLI, Self.macOsDesktop:
+            "macOS"
+        case Self.linuxCLI, Self.linuxDesktop:
+            "Linux"
+        case Self.uwp:
+            "Windows UWP"
+        case Self.sdk, Self.server:
+            ""
+        default:
+            Localizations.unknown
+        }


Localizations.unknown is referenced for unknown device platforms/types, but there is no "Unknown" = ... key in BitwardenResources/Localizations/en.lproj/Localizable.strings, so SwiftGen likely won’t generate Localizations.unknown and this will fail to compile. Consider adding a generic "Unknown" localization key or reusing an existing generic key if one already exists.

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:35Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Enum/DeviceActivityStatus.swift

+            Localizations.today
+        case .thisWeek:
+            Localizations.thisWeek
+        case .lastWeek:
+            Localizations.lastWeek
+        case .thisMonth:
+            Localizations.thisMonth
+        case .overThirtyDaysAgo:
+            Localizations.overThirtyDaysAgo
+        case .unknown:
+            Localizations.unknown


Localizations.today, thisWeek, lastWeek, thisMonth, overThirtyDaysAgo, and unknown don’t appear to be backed by keys in BitwardenResources/Localizations/en.lproj/Localizable.strings, so SwiftGen likely won’t generate these properties and this will not compile. Add the missing localization keys (at least in en.lproj) or change the code to use existing keys.

Suggested change

Localizations.today

case .thisWeek:

Localizations.thisWeek

case .lastWeek:

Localizations.lastWeek

case .thisMonth:

Localizations.thisMonth

case .overThirtyDaysAgo:

Localizations.overThirtyDaysAgo

case .unknown:

Localizations.unknown

return "Today"

case .thisWeek:

return "This week"

case .lastWeek:

return "Last week"

case .thisMonth:

return "This month"

case .overThirtyDaysAgo:

return "Over 30 days ago"

case .unknown:

return "Unknown"

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:35Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Enum/DeviceType.swift

@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+import BitwardenKit
+import BitwardenResources
+import Foundation


Foundation is imported but not used in this file. Consider removing it to avoid unused-import warnings.

Suggested change

import Foundation

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:35Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Domain/DeviceListItem.swift

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+import BitwardenKit
+import BitwardenResources


BitwardenResources is imported but not used in this file. Consider removing it to avoid unused-import warnings.

Suggested change

import BitwardenResources

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:36Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/DeviceAPIService.swift

@@ -17,6 +30,15 @@ protocol DeviceAPIService {
 // MARK: - APIService

 extension APIService: DeviceAPIService {
+    func getCurrentDevice(appId: String) async throws -> DeviceResponse {
+        try await apiService.send(CurrentDeviceRequest(appId: appId))
+    }
+
+    func getDevices() async throws -> [DeviceResponse] {
+        let response = try await apiService.send(DevicesListRequest())
+        return response.data
+    }


New API methods getCurrentDevice(appId:) and getDevices() were added, but DeviceAPIServiceTests currently only covers knownDevice. Please add unit tests validating the request method/path (and basic decode/error cases) for these new methods to keep coverage consistent with the existing API service tests.

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:36Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Domain/DeviceListItem.swift

+        let type = DeviceType(device.type)
+        id = device.id
+        identifier = device.identifier
+        displayName = type.displayName


displayName is currently set to type.displayName, ignoring the server-provided device.name. This will make all list entries show only the derived type/category string rather than the user/device name. Consider using device.name when present (with a fallback to type.displayName).

Suggested change

displayName = type.displayName

displayName = device.name?.isEmpty == false ? device.name! : type.displayName

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:37Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Response/DeviceResponse.swift

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+import BitwardenKit


BitwardenKit is imported but not used in this file. If warnings are treated as errors in CI, this will fail the build; otherwise it still adds noise. Remove the unused import.

Suggested change

import BitwardenKit

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:37Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/Requests/DevicesListRequest.swift

+struct DevicesListRequest: Request {
+    typealias Response = DevicesListResponse
+
+    var method: HTTPMethod { .get }
+
+    var path: String { "/devices" }
+}


This new request doesn’t have a corresponding request test file (e.g., verifying method, path, query, and body) like KnownDeviceRequestTests does. Adding a small unit test helps prevent accidental endpoint regressions.

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:37Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Services/API/Device/Requests/CurrentDeviceRequest.swift

+struct CurrentDeviceRequest: Request {
+    typealias Response = DeviceResponse
+
+    // MARK: Properties
+
+    /// The unique app identifier for this device.
+    let appId: String
+
+    var method: HTTPMethod { .get }
+
+    var path: String { "/devices/identifier/\(appId)" }
+}


This new request doesn’t have a corresponding request test file (e.g., verifying method, path, query, and body) like KnownDeviceRequestTests does. Adding a small unit test helps prevent accidental endpoint regressions.

Copilot · 2026-03-25T17:29:37Z

BitwardenShared/Core/Auth/Models/Response/DeviceResponse.swift

+public struct DeviceResponse: JSONResponse, Equatable, Sendable, Identifiable, Hashable {
+    public static let decoder = JSONDecoder.defaultDecoder
+
+    // MARK: Properties
+
+    /// The unique identifier of the device.
+    public let id: String
+
+    /// The name of the device.
+    let name: String?
+
+    /// The unique identifier for this device instance.
+    let identifier: String
+
+    /// The numeric type of the device (maps to DeviceType).
+    let type: Int
+
+    /// The date the device was first registered.
+    let creationDate: Date
+
+    /// Whether the device is trusted.
+    let isTrusted: Bool
+
+    /// The date of the last activity on this device.
+    let lastActivityDate: Date?
+}


DeviceResponse is a new JSON model but there are no decoding tests/fixtures added alongside the other response-model tests in this directory. Adding a fixture + decoding test (including date decoding) would help catch API contract mismatches early.

[PM-33981] feat: Add device models and API layer

2f5e04d

andrebispo5 requested review from a team and matt-livefront as code owners March 25, 2026 17:20

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings March 25, 2026 17:20

github-actions bot added app:password-manager Bitwarden Password Manager app context t:feature labels Mar 25, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of andrebispo5 March 25, 2026 17:21 View session

andrebispo5 marked this pull request as draft March 25, 2026 17:25

Copilot AI reviewed Mar 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

andrebispo5 mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2026

[PM-33981] feat: Add device management UI components #2490

Draft

andrebispo5 added the innovation Feature work related to Innovation Sprint or BEEEP projects label Mar 30, 2026

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[PM-33981] feat: Add device models and API layer#2489

[PM-33981] feat: Add device models and API layer#2489
andrebispo5 wants to merge 1 commit intopm-33981/innovation-device-listfrom
pm-33981/device-models-api

andrebispo5 commented Mar 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

		@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
		import BitwardenKit
		import BitwardenResources

	displayName = type.displayName
	displayName = device.name?.isEmpty == false ? device.name! : type.displayName

Conversation

andrebispo5 commented Mar 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🎟️ Tracking

📔 Objective

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Great job! No new security vulnerabilities introduced in this pull request

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

andrebispo5 commented Mar 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading