We are running two restful apis, one with http and the other is with udp.
They are running on premise infrastructure and within next few release, we'd need run them as google container once we dockenize them
Before we put the service up in cloud and all that, we need to implement oauth!
My question is that where to start and how we should approach implementing oauth 2 considering the road map I described?
Truly appreciate any suggestions.
It kind of depends on what you want to use OAuth2 for.
One option is toThere are OAuth2 implementations for most languages (e.g. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OLTU/Index)
This allows you to keep your own login/password system.
If you'd rather delegate the auth and identity to a provider like Google, then you just need to implement the OAuth2 dance to get a user's identity from Google, see https://developers.google.com/accounts/docs/OpenIDConnect for more details.
(and when it comes time to use container engine, visit us on IRC #google-containers if you have questions about containers and Google!)
Related
So I have been looking into OAuth lately, I want to authorize another of my domain which has separate database using OAuth. Upon searching I found auth0.com. Which sounded similar to Oauth and I created a sample implementation, it offers support for custom databases also. We have users stored in external api running on .net core, and I learnt that auth0.com is not free after trial expiration. So my efforts kindof got wasted. Now I am looking for authorization method that works for both domains.
Now my question is, does it even make sense to use Oauth for this task? Since I won't be giving it to third party and it's matter of two databases. How should i approach this and what are opensource Oauth services that allow custom database.
I'm building a small microservice-based webapp using JHipster with JWT authorization. The Architecture is simple, one gateway and two services with repositories. The problem that I had for the last few hours is the communication between the two backend-services.
At first, I tried to find a token on the services themself, but couldn't find it. If I just missed it in all the docs (quite overwhelming when beginning with the full stack :P), I would be happy to revert my changes and use the predefined token.
My second approach was that each service will authorize itself with the gateway at PostConstruct and save the token in memory to use it each API call. It works without a problem, but I find it hard to believe that this functionality is not already programmed in JHipster.
So my question is whether my approach is usual? If neither is true and there are some best-practices for it, I'm also interested in them.
It depends on the use case.
For user requests, a common approach is: the calling service forwards the token it received to the other service without going through the gateway suing #AuthorizedFeignClient.
For background tasks like scheduled jobs, your approach can be applied or you could also issue long life tokens as long as they have limited permissions through roles. This way you don't have to go through gateway.
Keycloak's offline tokens approach could also inspire you.
Due to requirement changes we need to add a node server to our already existing system. We will be using sails.js for the realtime communication part of the app and redis store for session management. But the confusion now is what is the best way to authenticate the client app/user on both servers with one login form.
Any help will be much appreciated.
Unless you have specific limitations or widhes, this sounds like standard requirement for SSO (Single Sign-On) implementation. OAuth is wide-spread standard in this area.
Ruby have implementations for this, see this repository for example
OAuth2 A Ruby wrapper for the OAuth 2.0 specification.
As for reading materials, you can check this article:
Single Sign On (SSO) for Multiple Applications with Devise, OmniAuth
and Custom OAuth2 Implementation in Rails
This tutorial may also help.
Then, you can implement OAuth in your node js server, and other services when needed.
Or detail your question and specific requirements or limits for other options. Meanwhile, you can check this SO question on other non-SSO options.
I'm starting a new system creating using .NET MVC - which is a relatively large scale business management platform. There's some indication that we'll open the platform to public once it is released and pass the market test.
We will be using ExtJs for the front-end which leads us to implement most data mining work return in JSON format - this makes me think whether I should learn the OAuth right now and try to embed the OAuth concept right from the beginning?
Basically the platform we want to create will initially fully implemented internally with a widget system; our boss is thinking to learn from Twitter to build just a core database and spread out all different features into other modules that can be integrated into the platform. To secure that in the beginning I proposed intranet implementation which is safer without much authentication required; however they think it will be once-for-all efforts if we can get a good implementation like OAuth into the platform as we start? (We are team of 6 and none of us know much about OAuth in fact!)
I don't know much about OAuth, so if it's worth to implement at the beginning of our system, I'll have to take a look and have my vote next week for OAuth in our meeting. This may effect how we gonna implement the whole web service thing, so may I ask anyone who's done large-scale web service /application before give some thoughts and advice for me?
Thanks.
OAuth 1 is nice if you want to use HTTP connections. If you can simply enforce HTTPS connections for all users, you might want to use OAuth 2, which is hardly more than a shared token between the client and server that's sent for each single request, plus a pre-defined way to get permission from the user via a web interface.
If you have to accept plain HTTP as well, OAuth 1 is really nice. It protects against replay attacks, packet injection or modification, uses a shared secret instead of shared token, etc. It is, however, a bit harder to implement than OAuth 2.
OAuth 2 is mostly about how to exchange username/password combinations for an access token, while OAuth 1 is mostly about how make semi-secure requests to a server over an unencrypted connection. If you don't need any of that, don't use OAuth. In many cases, Basic HTTP Authentication via HTTPS will do just fine.
OAuth is a standard for authentication and authorization. You can read about it in many places and learn; Generally the standard lets a client register in the authentication server, and then whenever this client attempts to access a protected resource, he is directed to the auth-server to get a token (first he gets a code, then he exchanges it with a token). But this is only generally, there are tons of details and options here...
Basically, one needs a good reason to use oAuth. If a simpler authentication mechanism is good for you - go for it.
I am in the process of re-writing some very outdated .NET 2.0 SOAP web services for my company. So I am rewriting them using MVC3 RESTful. This method would simplify the usage of our services for our client base (over 500 clients using our current SOAP services) who are on multiple platforms and languages.
I am looking for a BETTER method of authorization for the RESTful services, than what the previous developer used for our .NET 2.0 SOAP web services (he basically just had the client pass in a GUID as a parameter and matched it in code behind).
I have looked into oAuth and I want to use it, HOWEVER, I have been told, from my superiors, that this method is TOO complicated for the "level" of clients that connect to our services and want me to find another simpler way for them to connect but still have authorization. Most of our clients have BASIC to no knowledge of programming (either we helped them get their connection setup OR they hired some kid to do it for them). This is another reason that the superiors want a different method, because we can't have all 500+ (plus 5-10 new clients a day) asking for help on how to implement oAuth.
So, is there another way to secure the MVC3 services other than passing a preset GUID?
I have looked into using Windows Authentication on the services site, but is this really logical for 500+ clients to use?
Is there an easy and secure method of authorizing multiple users on multiple platforms to use the MVC3 RESTful services that a end-client can implement very easily?
Thanks.
If you don't want anything too complicated, have a look at Basic HTTP Authentication. If you use it over SSL then it should be safe enough and also easy enough to implement for your clients. The Twitter API actually used this up until a few months ago when they switched to OAuth.
You want to distinguish between authentication and authorization. What you are looking for is authentication and indeed as Caps suggests, the easiest way may be to use HTTP BASIC authentication along with SSL to make the password is not compromised.
You could look into other means of authentication e.g. DIGEST or more advanced using ADFS or SAML (ADFS could be compelling since you're in .NET). Have a look at OpenID Connect too - it is strongly supported by Google and has great support.
Once you are done with that, you may want to consider authorization - if you need it that is - to control what a given client can do on a given resource / item / record. For that you can use claims-based authorization as provided in the .NET framework or if you need finer-grained authorization, look into XACML.
OAuth wouldn't really solve your issue since OAuth is about delegation of authorization i.e. I let Twitter write to my Facebook account on my behalf.
HTH