pushbullet and OAuth - oauth

I have a simple question about using Pushbullet's OAuth API and was not able to find the answer on PUshbullet's site. Specifically, if I register my client app to use Pushbullet's OAuth authentication and I send my users to give their approval to allow me to use their Pushbullet's credentials, what happens if the person is not already a Pushbullet user? Will they be allowed to register themselves with Pushbullet as a new user (I hope!) AND then be redirected back to my app, or will that kind of break the OAuth flow? I am trying to use Pushbullet as my notifications mechanism for my mobile hybrid app and it seems like it is a great fit, but I know many of my users will not know how to recover if they break out of being redirected back to my web app. TIA.
JLP

New users should be redirected to your app. You should test it yourself to make sure though.

Related

Rails backend for an iOS app, twitter sign in

I'm using omniauth-twitter for twitter log in to the website and it works perfectly well (go to /auth/twitter, user authenticates, and then redirect_to /auth/twitter/callback). Great.
However, on the iOS side, how can I implement sign in with twitter? Do I do it client side or server side? Could anybody go through the steps? (note: the only way to sign in to the app is through twitter)
We've tried:
using a UIWebView that goes to /auth/twitter, but on redirect, it goes back to the web version. Is there a way to get JSON data from the UIWebView?
doing sign in with twitter client side, and using a made up password to authenticate in sessions#create that matches a made up password on the db.
Is there another alternative for authentication? I know what we're doing has a lot of flaws but we couldn't find any other solutions even after asking in meetups and researching online for days. please help!
You could add an OAuth 2
implementation on your server. Your server authorizes the iOS app for an authenticated user / content owner. (You have completed the authentication part.) Once authorized, the iOS app accesses that particular user's content (via an api on your server) as if it is logged in as that user.
You will find one potential OAuth 2 provider implementation for RoR as
applicake/doorkeeper
You will find a sample iOS client application as
telegraphy-interactive/OAuthClientSetup
That is one suggestion, in any case. Not the whole answer, which would require a book chapter.

User Authentication with Rails App

I have two Rails apps, and I would like to accept user login credentials from one app (say App A) in another (say App B). For the app that's accepting login credentials (App B), I think the best option is to use OAuth. But for the app whose user credentials are being used (App A), how do I allow the user's login information to be used by another site? Do I use OAuth as well, or something like Doorkeeper? As you can tell, I'm very new to user authentication, so any advice would be helpful!
One possible way to solve the problem is to create a doorkeeper-based standalone app that would contain all of a user's credentials. Then your client apps would actually connect with this "auth app" (using Oauth.) Then when the client is authenticated on the Auth App, they get returned to the Client app. Of course, from a UI perspective, you make this seamless, so your login page would actually be on this Auth app, but it would look seamless to the user. This way, you can add as many apps as you want and the credentials would all be in one place. To answer your specific question, you would use Oauth2 on your Client apps and Doorkeeper on your Auth App.
You'll need to tweak the doorkeeper configurations to make this process "clean" to the user. For example for internal apps, you can safely use the skip_authorization method in doorkeeper. Learn more about that here
This doorkeeper/oauth system has the added benefit of decoupling your authentication logic from your main application, which is fundamental to good Service Oriented Design. There are certainly other ways to approach this problem, but given the context of your question, yes, Doorkeeper and Oauth2 would solve your problem.

iOS Twitter website single sign on

Say that you have an iOS app, and a user that has one or more Twitter accounts set up on their device. Is it possible to load part of Twitter's mobile site into a UIWebView within the app with the user automatically signed in as one of those accounts?
Obviously, accessing the accounts would require the user's permission, which is fine. And probably after the first time, the site would remember the user anyway. But it would be nice to not force the user to enter their credentials again.
I know that I can use Reverse Auth to get OAuth tokens for an iOS Twitter account, but I haven't found anything concrete to allow me to exchange those tokens for authentication on twitter.com.
Well, according to Twitter's Taylor Singletary, it's not possible. Boo.

Web App: To use login of <major web site with api> instead of a native one: Too risky?

My plan for this web app is that it needs the user to log in with LinkedIn, and the user's id on the site and database is their LinkedIn id.
So, the most convenient and elegant thing would seem to be to have no "native" login at all, and just have the user log in with LinkedIn from the start.
Having seen recent disaster for Twitter api developers, I now wonder if this is considered too risky. I am assuming that it is allowed by LinkedIn (haven't checked that yet).
Alternatives could be:
native login then login with LinkedIn after that.
OpenId login and then login LinkedIn after that.
Somehow have a backup login incase linkedin kicks me off.
Any thoughts on the main idea or alternatives? Any other ideas?
As soon as you require a user to create a native login, you're making the usability of your app more challenging IMO. I hate, hate, hate it when I'm forced to create a new account on a site when a single button press would work.
Of course, usability would be at near zero in the unlikely circumstance that LinkedIn's provider no longer works for your app. So, there are tradeoffs.
Does LinkedIn provide access to the user's e-mail address when you authorize them? If that's the case, you could just login with LinkedIn. If LinkedIn's provider no longer works for your app, you could send users an email with a temporary password in an authoritative way. If they don't provide an e-mail address via their provider, then you'll be forced to collect it separately directly from the user (and potentially verify it in case the user made a typo or something).

Restful API, how an app can (re)match a user to an existing one?

I asked various questions about my problem (here and here) and I also asked in the #oauth & #openid freenode's channel on IRC. (this is note an "UP" question, it's an other problem)
I'll sum up my project configuration : Anyone will have the possibility to create an app that can use my API. To start, I'll work on my API and a Web based app, but the documentation about the API will be public. It's a bit like Twitter API.
The problem I face is how can I be sure which user is using the API (to retrieve his personal data, like your tweets), even if the User is using an app that I don't know who make it (again, like twitter and all the apps around).
I googled a lot and with the help of the previous answers given, I took a look at OAuth.
As far as I understood the way OAuth works, here how :
A user visit an app that use my API (web, mobile, whatever)
The apps redirect the user to the API for the authentication (I'll use OpenId) and the authorization (OAuth). This is a bit odd since the API will have a web interface for the login and the authorization (I suppose this is how it works since Twitter do that)
The API redirect the connected user to the app, with some tokens. In these tokens, there is a token representing the user that the app must store in order to indicate to the API which user is using it currently (Am I correct?)
So far, everything goes well. But what I can't figure it out, is when the user quit the app and goes again : how the app can remember the user is the one that used it before ?
(Before some of you bring me the cookie answer, I'll remark this is a simple example, it would be the same if the user clear his cookies, format his computer or change its computer.)
The only solution I can find, is when an unauthenticated user (without a remembering cookie for example) goes to the app, the app redirect him again to the API to authenticate himself, but this time, the user won't have to re-allow the app (authorization) since it already did it. The API will then return the user to the app to allow him to play with this.
Is this the proper & secure way to do it ?
The #OAuth IRC channel told me about the new protocol, WebID, but this is currently in pre-draft mode and I don't want to use something that will change continuously in the future :/
Thank you very much for your help!
Short answer: OAuth results in an authenticated access token. That access token is tied to ONE user. And as long as the access token is valid. The third application can do whatever the API allows the access token to do.
Long answer:
The thing with OAuth is that it does not "Log in" a user. OAuth gives third party applications what is called access tokens which can be used to access data on behalf of a user whether he/she is logged in or not.
Many services restrict their access tokens. Twitter for example issues two types of access tokens, read-only, and read/write. But there is no concept of logging in to use APIs. While an access token is valid, a third party application can access the user's data, and change things without a user's explicit interaction.
Most API providers have functionality to revoke access tokens. That is what happens when you in twitter look at your Connections page . See the revoke access links?
Personally I love the OAuth approach. As an API provider, you can control what access tokens are allowed to do, and the user can kill bad applications from using his/her resources. OAuth is secure as far as authentication goes. Third party applications do not get hold of user's passwords. But once authenticated they can do whatever your API allows.
if we take a look at how Twitter works, I think the missing point is an other layer to the project: The Official website:
The thing is, when you want to allow any 3rd party application to use Twitter, this application redirect you to the OAuth page of the Twitter API, IF you are connected, but if you aren't, it redirect you to the login page, which is located at http://api.twitter.com/login
(I don't know if keeping the api in api.twitter.com for loging an user, instead of just twitter.com is correct, but this is just semantics)
So, the workflow would be:
A user goes to a 3rd party application (like a website)
This third party redirect the user to the API for Authorization
The API redirect the User to the website for Authentication first
The official website redirect the User to the OpenId provider (or Facebook connect)
The Authentication is made (via multiple requests)
The website redirect the user to the API after he's successfully authenticated
The user allow/disallow the permissions asked by the 3rd party apps
The API returns to the 3rd party apps.
The User can now use (or not) the application.
This implementation have 2 problems:
Every time an User ins't authenticated (cleared it's cookies, connect himself from an other computer, etc), he will have to go through the Authentication method, by being redirected to the Official website and then being redirected to the 3rd party application (the API would be transparent, since it has already allowed the application to access his data).
All those layers would certainly lost the User on the Authentication process with too many redirections.
A possible solution would be to store the user's access_token, for example in the case of a mobile app, but with a pure html/css/js oriented app, this isn't possible. A login/password in the 3rd party web application that would match the user to the access_token of the API would be an other solution, like Seesmic (I think), but this is just useless (for us, not Seesmic) : the idea of not having the user's password become useless.
This is a possible explanation but I would require more details on how this is possible and your thought about that solution. Would it work?
(I added this as an answer since it's an (incomplete and not so sure, I agree) one.

Resources