All OAutt Authorization code flow examples I've seen sends the user to a specific login page provided by the IDP Server (Identity Provider Server).
https://auth0.com/docs/flows/authorization-code-flow-with-proof-key-for-code-exchange-pkce
I'm wondering can the login page be on the client itself, as in through an APP or SPA? Or is this something unsecure which I am not aware off. Thank
Usually it is standard to redirect as you say, but security also depends on the credential being used:
If a user is signing in via their Google password then your app should definitely never see the credentials and you should always redirect
If the user is signed in via a password stored at Company X, to only access data stored at Company X, and the password is not used for any other purposes, then it is less bad, since the company owns all of the assets involved
People who avoid redirecting usually end up using a deprecated flow such as Resource Owner Password Grant. I would avoid that, since it will not fare well in security reviews and restricts your future authentication options.
To be on the safe side I would recommend sticking to the redirect model, and using a login method provided by the Identity Management System vendor.
FUTURE DIRECTION
Interestingly, there is an emerging trend from some vendors to remain within the app when that makes sense. See the Hypermedia Authentication API, which may become a standard. A key characteristic of this is that the Authorization Server continues to govern security and tell the app what to do.
I have an old windows application written in VB.NET with SQL server backend. Currently the new user additions, deletion, adding entitlements etc. are managed by an old approval workflow system. After getting approvals, the user details and entitlements are inserted in to the SQL server database table manually.
I am trying to integrate this application with the SailPoint's Identity and access management. So the new user addition, deletion update and adding entitlements etc will be done through Sailpoint. For this, I would require to create a WEB API which can be called by Sailpoint and expose the functionalities(add user/delete user/add entitlements). The only consumer to this API is SailPoint.
I am new to OAuth and below are the grant types that I came across. But not sure which one I should be using in this particular scenario.
1.Implicit Grant
2.Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant
3.Client Credentials Grant
4.Authorization Code Grant
I have done research on the different authentication methods that we can use to secure the web api. But still confused on which one to apply in this scenario as this new web api is going to be made available in internet.
I already tried developing a POC with the OAuth 2.0 with password grant type referring this article. But when I read articles in the internet I found that the password grant type is not that secure and is deprecated.
Could you please advise on which grant type(client credentials/authorization code/implicit) to use in this scenario. I believe authorization code is used when the user is directly trying to access the API. In this scenario, SailPoint will be calling the API in the backend programmatically when they insert a new user in their UI.
I think it's a good approach to use client credentials in this case because the communication between IIQ and your Web API can be considered an API-to-API communication, I mean, IIQ is acting on behalf of itself in this communication.
See this article for more details - https://dzone.com/articles/four-most-used-rest-api-authentication-methods (bold part by myself)
OAuth 2.0 provides several popular flows suitable for different types
of API clients:
Authorization code — The most common flow, it is mostly used for
server-side and mobile web applications. This flow is similar to how
users sign up into a web application using their Facebook or Google
account.
Implicit — This flow requires the client to retrieve an
access token directly. It is useful in cases when the user’s
credentials cannot be stored in the client code because they can be
easily accessed by the third party. It is suitable for web, desktop,
and mobile applications that do not include any server component.
Resource owner password — Requires logging in with a username and
password. In that case, the credentials will be a part of the request.
This flow is suitable only for trusted clients (for example, official
applications released by the API provider).
Client Credentials —
Intended for the server-to-server authentication, this flow describes
an approach when the client application acts on its own behalf rather
than on behalf of any individual user. In most scenarios, this flow
provides the means to allow users to specify their credentials in the
client application, so it can access the resources under the client’s
control.
I'm suppose to build a web application and a mobile application (for iOS) that share the same database. Currently I'm thiking about having a RESTful API and have both applications (web and iOS) comunicate with the API to access data. My problem is the authentication method that I should use. I've been researching about OAuth2.0 but that's not quite the thing I want because I don't want the user to have to authorize the connection as it happens when you log in somewhere using facebook or google+. I just want to make the login with a username and password and then stay logged in. And this for both the apps (web and iOS).
I'm using Node.JS and MongoDB to build the API.
I'm trying to do things "the correct way" because this is suppose to be the final project for my masters.
Can you guys give me some lights in how I can achieve this?
Use OAuth 2.0 so you have an extensible standard and token-based authentication which enables users to revoke authentication tickets, e.g. if their phone was stolen.
OAuth 2.0 supports various grant types. Those that you from facebook and twitter logins can be summarized as '3-legged oauth', but there's also two grant types for 2-legged OAuth, especially the resource owner password credentials grant (section 4.3 at the end of the page) which will simply exchange username and password for an authentication token. There's no need to implement 3-legged oauth if you don't want to.
I'd suggest to use database-stored tokens over crypto-based self-validating tokens for most use cases. The possibility to revoke individual grants, or all grants of specific client applications is super helpful in practice. It also shortens tokens a lot and reduces the risk of a catastrophic security leak because of a flaw in the implementation. Make sure the token itself is crypto-strong random and use a simple crypto-wrapper around the actual token value to enable cheap identification of (badly) faked tokens.
Something like Passport (no, not the whisky, but the middleware) could be a good thing to test
It allows to choose among many different authentication methods in an easy and transparent way
This is more of a general question but I hope it is still valid for SO.
So far I have learned, that in general, a mobile app (such as official Pinterest app) use the Password credential flow to let their users login and access the API directly. (let's just assume they use OAuth for this)
So they collect username and password, send it to their server and get a token in return which is used for subsequent requests.
Now a user did not want to register and created an account using e.g. Facebook as the authorization server. So my question is:
How is this flow implemented?
My educated guess:
User chooses "Login with Facebook" in mobile app
Facebook Login Page opens with return_uri = mobile app
Mobile app receives auth token
Mobile app uses client credentials and says the API: Use this token for user X
Is this correct?
First of all, apps should not use the Password Credentials Grant. The specification is rather clear about it:
In the traditional client-server authentication model, the client
requests an access-restricted resource (protected resource) on the
server by authenticating with the server using the resource owner's
credentials. In order to provide third-party applications access to
restricted resources, the resource owner shares its credentials with
the third party. This creates several problems and limitations
The specification then goes on describing those problems.
And about the Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant:
The authorization server should take special care when enabling this grant type and only allow it when other flows are not viable.
The entire purpose of OAuth 2.0, I to not have to use something like the Password Credentials Grant, where the user hands over their password to the application.
About your second question: what happens when a user does not want to register and create an account with your app, but wants to use e.g. Facebook for authentication?
Remember that both the Implicit Grant, as well as the Authorization Code Grant, work by using a browser control to authenticate the user. In that browser session with the Authorization Server, you are free to authenticate your user in any which way you want. Certainly, you can use your own user/password database, but you could also use other mechanisms, such as WS-Federation. In your case, it sounds like the user want to authenticate using Facebook.
Authenticating using Facebook is then not done by your client app, but by your Authorization Server. It typically does that by using the Facebook Authorization Code Grant, followed by a call to read the user's profile to obtain their Facebook user id, name, and so on.
If you do not want to build such an Authorization server yourself, you can use an existing one. Several companies offer login-as-a-service solutions, including the one I work for.
UPDATE: You asked several follow up questions in a comment below. I'll answer them briefly here:
First of all, the fact that some companies that use OAuth to secure their services allow for a Password Credentials Grant, does not imply that you should. In fact, there are probably more examples of companies that don't offer this possibility, than companies that do.
There are real trust issues, and real security risks with sharing your password with a device app. To start with, the app on the device is easier to hack than a server. Furthermore, if you give the app your password, presumably that app also needs to store it somewhere for future use. As a user, I just have to hope that that storage is safe form possible malware running on my machine. For more issues, see the introduction in the OAuth 2.0 specification mentioned above.
Secondly, all good Authorization Servers differentiate between First Party Clients and Third Party Clients. A First Party Client such as yours is controlled by the same company that controls the Authorization Server, and for such an app the Authorization Server does not ask for user permission to share data, since it makes no sense to talk about sharing data with yourself. That is why the web sites of these companies don't ask you whether you allow to share the data they hold on your behalf with them. They already have it, and there is no "sharing" going on.
Of course, you might argue that you have never seen any of these companies talking about this distinction between First Party Clients and Third Party Clients. But the reason they don't should be obvious: when you deal with them, you are always a Third Party App. They don't need to tell you that they treat themselves differently.
The mechanism I would choose in your scenario depends on the nature of the client app, and the nature of the services it accesses. What are your requirements?
Anyway, if the device the application is running on has a secure storage facility, such as Windows Phone 8.1, I would probably consider using the Authorization Code Grant without client credentials. That way, the user never has to log in again. If we're talking about a web site or a SPA, I would consider the Implicit Grant (where the "remember me" feature, if any, is offered by the Authorization Server). Again, the specification gives advantages and disadvantages of each grant type for several scenario's.
What exactly is OAuth (Open Authorization)?
I have gleaned some information from
OAuth
Twitter Tutorial: What is OAuth And What It Means To You
What is OAuth
But I want to learn and know more. I'm looking for info on the lifecycle. Why do most of the social networks rely on this open protocol?
Will it become a de facto in near future with the various technologies (e.g. ASP.NET)?
What exactly is OAuth (Open Authorization)?
OAuth allows notifying a resource provider (e.g. Facebook) that the resource owner (e.g. you) grants permission to a third-party (e.g. a Facebook Application) access to their information (e.g. the list of your friends).
If you read it stated plainly, I would understand your confusion. So let's go with a concrete example: joining yet another social network!
Say you have an existing Gmail account. You decide to join LinkedIn. Adding all of your many, many friends manually is tiresome and error-prone. You might get fed up halfway or insert typos in their e-mail address for the invitation. So you might be tempted not to create an account after all.
Facing this situation, LinkedIn™ has the good idea to write a program that adds your list of friends automatically because computers are far more efficient and effective at tiresome and error-prone tasks. Since joining the network is now so easy, there is no way you would refuse such an offer, now would you?
Without an API for exchanging this list of contacts, you would have to give LinkedIn the username and password to your Gmail account, thereby giving them too much power.
This is where OAuth comes in. If your GMail supports the OAuth protocol, then LinkedIn can ask you to authorize them to access your Gmail list of contacts.
OAuth allows for:
Different access levels: read-only VS read-write. This allows you to grant access to your user list or bi-directional access to automatically synchronize your new LinkedIn friends to your Gmail contacts.
Access granularity: you can decide to grant access to only your contact information (username, e-mail, date of birth, etc.) or to your entire list of friends, calendar and whatnot.
It allows you to manage access from the resource provider's application. If the third-party application does not provide a mechanism for canceling access, you would be stuck with them having access to your information. With OAuth, there is a provision for revoking access at any time.
Will it become a de facto (standard?) in near future?
Well, although OAuth is a significant step forward, it doesn't solve problems if people don't use it correctly. For instance, if a resource provider gives only a single read-write access level to all your resources at once and doesn't provide a mechanism for managing access, then there is no point to it. In other words, OAuth is a framework to provide authorization functionality and not just authentication.
In practice, it fits the social network model very well. It is especially popular for those social networks that want to allow third-party "plugins". This is an area where access to the resources is inherently necessary and is also inherently unreliable (i.e. you have little or no quality control over those applications).
I haven't seen so many other uses out in the wild. I mean, I don't know of an online financial advisory firm that will access your bank records automatically, although it could technically be used that way.
What is OAuth?
OAuth is simply a secure authorization protocol that deals with the authorization of third-party applications to access the user data without exposing their password. (e.g. login with Facebook, gPlus, Twitter in many websites) all work under this protocol.
Parties involved
The Protocol becomes easier when you know the involved parties. Basically, there are three parties involved: OAuth Provider, OAuth Client, and Owner.
OAuth Client (Application Which wants to access your credential)
OAuth Provider (eg. Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
Owner (the person with Facebook, Twitter, etc. account )
How It Works
I have supposed a scenario where a website (Stack Overflow) needs to add a login with the Facebook feature. Thus Facebook is OAuth Provider and the Stack Overflow is OAuth Client.
This step is done by the app's developer. At the very beginning, Facebook (OAuth Provider) has no idea about the Stack Overflow (OAuth Client) because there is no link between them. So the very first step is to register Stack Overflow with Facebook developers site. This is done manually where developers need to give the app's information to Facebook like the app's name, website, logo, redirectUrl (important one). Then Stack Overflow is successfully registered, has got client Id, client secret, etc from Facebook, and is up and running with OAuth.
Now when Stack Overflow's user clicks login with Facebook button. Stack Overflow requests Facebook with ClientId (Facebook uses it to recognize the client) and redirectUrl (Facebook will return back to this URL after success). Thus the user gets redirected to the Facebook login page. This is the best part user(owner) is not giving their Facebook credential to Stack Overflow.
After Owner allows Stack Overflow to access the information. Then Facebook redirects back to Stack Overflow, along with authcode using the redirectUrl provided at step 2.
Then Stack Overflow contacts Facebook along with the obtained authcode to make sure everything is okay.
Only then Facebook will give access token to Stack Overflow. Then access token is used by Stack Overflow to retrieve the owner's information without using a password. This is the whole motive of OAuth, where actual credentials are never exposed to third-party applications.
For More:
Quick video
Web Link
Simply put OAuth is a way for applications to gain credentials to your information without directly getting your user login information to some website. For example if you write an application on your own website and want it to use data from a user's facebook account, you can use OAuth to get a token via a callback url and then use that token to make calls to the facebook API to get their use data until the token expires. Websites rely on it because it allows programmers to access their data without the user having to directly disclose their information and spread their credentials around online but still provide a level of protection to the data. Will it become the de facto method of authorization? Perhaps, it's been gaining a lot of support recently from Twitter, Facebook, and the likes where other programmers want to build applications around user data.
OAuth(Open Authorization) is an open standard for access granting/deligation protocol. It used as a way for Internet users to grant websites or applications access to their information on other websites but without giving them the passwords. It does not deal with authentication.
Or
OAuth 2.0 is a protocol that allows a user to grant limited access to their resources on one site, to another site, without having to expose their credentials.
Analogy 1: Many luxury cars today come with a valet key. It is a special key you give the parking attendant and unlike your regular key, will not allow the car to drive more than a mile or two. Some valet keys will not open the trunk, while others will block access to your onboard cell phone address book. Regardless of what restrictions the valet key imposes, the idea is very clever. You give someone limited access to your car with a special key, while using your regular key to unlock everything. src from auth0
Analogy 2: Assume, we want to fill an application form for a bank account. Here Oauth works as, instead of filling the form by applicant, bank can fill the form using Adhaar or passport.
Here the following three entities are involved:
Applicant i.e. Owner
Bank Account is OAuth Client, they need information
Adhaar/Passport ID is OAuth Provider
Oauth is definitely gaining momentum and becoming popular among enterprise APIs as well.
In the app and data driven world, Enterprises are exposing APIs more and more to the outer world in line with Google, Facebook, twitter.
With this development a 3 way triangle of authentication gets formed
1) API provider- Any enterprise which exposes their assets by API, say Amazon,Target etc
2) Developer - The one who build mobile/other apps over this APIs
3) The end user- The end user of the service provided by the - say registered/guest users of Amazon
Now this develops a situation related to security - (I am listing few of these complexities)
1) You as an end user wants to allow the developer to access APIs on behalf of you.
2) The API provider has to authenticate the developer and the end user
3) The end user should be able to grant and revoke the permissions for the consent they have given
4) The developer can have varying level of trust with the API provider, in which the level of permissions given to her is different
The Oauth is an authorization framework which tries to solve the above mentioned problem in a standard way. With the prominence of APIs and Apps this problem will become more and more relevant and any standard which tries to solve it - be it ouath or any other - will be something to care about as an API provider/developer and even end user!
OAuth is all about delegating Authorization (choosing someone who can do Authorization for you). Note that Authentication and Authorization are different things. OAuth is Authorization (Access control), and if you want to implement Authentication (ID verification) also, OpenID protocol can be used on top of OAuth.
All big companies like Facebook, Google, Github,... use this kind of authentication/authorization nowadays. For example, I just signed in on this website using my Google account, this means Stackoverflow doesn't know my password, it receives the allowance from Google where my password (hashed obviously) is saved. This gives a lot of benefits, one of them is; In the near future you won't have to make several accounts on every website. One website (which you trust most) can be used to login to all other websites. So you'll only have to remember one password.
OAuth happened when we sign up SO account with Facebook/ Google
button.
Application (SO) redirecting user to the provider's authorization URL. ( Displaying a web page asking the user if he or she wishes to grant the application access to read and update their data).
User agree to grant the application process.
Service provider redirects user back to application (SO), passing authorization code as parameter.
SO exchanges the code for an access grant.
Source : OAuth1 service providers
OAuth is an open standard for authorization, commonly used as a way for Internet users to log into third party websites using their Microsoft, Google, Facebook or Twitter accounts without exposing their password.
Authorization: OAuth as it name suggests is simply a standard for Authorization.
Used for log into third party websites: With OAuth, you can log into third party websites with your Google, Facebook, Twitter or Microsoft accounts without having the necessity to provide your passwords.
Remembering passwords: Using OAuth you can avoid creating accounts and remembering passwords on each and every web application that you use on the Internet.
Access token: OAuth is based on an access token concept. When a person authenticate hinself using his Google account, to a third party web application. Google authorization server issues an access token for that web application the person is using. Thus, the web application can use that access token to access his data hosted in the resource server. In the case of Google, your Gmail inbox, contacts, photos etc. are the resources. So, any third party application can access those resources, for an example view his Gmail inbox using OAuth. Hence, OAuth is a simple way to publish and interact with protected resource data. It’s also a safer and more secure way for people to give you access to their resource data.
OAuth2 and HTTPS: OAuth2 uses HTTPS for communication between the client and the authorization server because of confidential data for example client credentials. passing between the two applications.
OAuth is a protocol that is used from Resource Owner(facebook, google, tweeter, microsoft live and so on) to provide a needed information, or to provide a permission for write success to third party system(your site for example). Most likely without OAuth protocol the credentials should be available for the third part systems which will be inappropriate way of communication between those systems.