Why access_token on twitter's streaming API? - twitter

I am trying to set up a cache service and take use of the streaming api of Twitter. It confuses me, since this is a server-to-server use, why do I still need to use an access_token when no user are involved in the process, only the application?

So Twitter can have information on how are their API and services being used. Also, to prevent DoS and other kind of attacks

Related

Is there any way to combine client-side and server-side Google API authentication?

Currently I am implementing an Ionic application that the front-end is on the mobile devices and the back-end is on the server. (So there is a connection latency between the device and the server) And my application is using the Google services (like Gmail, calendar, etc) by connecting to the Google API.
Currently the architecture is:
Device <==> Server <==> Google API
This is using the OAuth 2.0 server-side authentication. It works but the connection latency is way too long and feels like going back to the time when we have the dial-up internet connection.
I tried to use the OAuth 2.0 client-side authentication, which is:
Device <==> Google API
This is faster but it has 2 problems:
Even though Ionic packaged the front-end code into an application, I still have concerns that the rule "Everything in the front-end is visible to everyone" stays. (Did not find an evidence to prove or disapprove this hypothesis)
Google API OAuth 2.0 only issues flows to the client-side authentication, and flows expire very often, I don't want the user to grant the permission again and again.
So, I was wondering if it is possible to do the following:
Use the server-side authentication to store keys/credentials (I'm using Django as the back-end, which is Python) and the front-end gets keys/credentials from the server and proceed Google service using JavaScript codes.
I know this is late to the party, but I'm going through this now. I think there are 2 ways to set this up, but neither are perfect.
Use server-side flow to authorize all the scopes you'll need on either the server or the client. When the token is obtained, pass it to your client. The down side is that the client now has a token that has access to more APIs than needed.
Create seperate authorization flows for both the client and server. This would mean the user has 2 authorization prompts, which is no good. The good thing about this approach is you could ensure the client has limited scopes, but the server could still handle the larger tasks (moving Drive files, sending emails, etc.)
In my case, the client would just need read access to the Contacts API, whereas the server needs full Drive access.
If anyone finds a combination approach, where only 1 authorization is needed, but the client and server have seperate scopes, that'd be the ideal situation.

Rails and OAuth2

More of a theoretical question here - how can you get around using OAuth when you don't want to use it, but are using an API that requires it.
For example recently I was looking through the Bing Ads API and noticed they now require you to do OAuth as part of the process. Which makes sense if you're making an application that allows a user to control their Bing Ads account via your app. However, let's say you wanted all of your users to interact with one Bing Ads account.
Is it possible to hardcode all of the OAuth pieces in the background and just use the same authentication for every user to essentially send their stuff to the same Bing Ads account.
- If so, what sort of negative impacts would there be on that?
While it is simply not possible to get around using OAuth if the API requires it, OAuth can be used for more than just the "access delegated to client by current user" use case. As you suggest, if you want all users of your app to interact with your Bing account ("on your behalf" on OAuth speak), you can certainly do that with OAuth.
For an OAuth 2.0 implementation this would mean that you obtain an access token and preferably a refresh token in some way for your app, e.g. by you yourself going once through the Authorization Code flow (also, some services allow you to generate tokens in their web UI). Then you would "hard-configure" the token(s) in your app and use it/them to talk to the Bing API.
If a refresh token is included as well as an access token then your app can get a new access token in the backend whenever the old one expires without you (or your users) having to go through that initial flow again.
Be aware that this is not good practice for mobile apps, where you would have to distribute your app with the tokens embedded in the binary packages. Those tokens could easily be grabbed through hacking/scanning those binaries. But when the tokens are used in a backend service and never exposed in the front end, this is a perfectly valid scenario.

What is the purpose of having access token for server side?

I see that when connecting services to twitter/facebook, sometimes apps are storing the user access token in the server. What is the most common purpose of doing this? I've read several twitter/fb documents and just don't seem to get it. Twitter also has an xAuth which can basically provide you with the user 'access_token', so what is the purpose of doing this?
You don't want 3RD parties pretending to be users. You want signed transactions so that authenticity is validated.
What if some application just started posting shit on your wall? This has a pretty obvious purpose.
Your app has to provide the token when making API requests that have been approved by the user. That's what OAuth is made for.
Instead of the service storing your facebook/twitter username/password on the server (which the service shouldn't know) it stores the access_token. The access_token can be used to make requests to the API. This is the purpouse of Oauth. It will enable you to write services which uses an external api like facebook without the user ever telling you theire username/password

OAuth: OAuth implementation use case

I have a webapp which does a lot of ajax requests with the php server and database server. I have also created an iPhone app and an Android app, which have been working as offline apps till now.
Now I want to create an API which will be used to sync data between web server and smartphone apps. Should I be using OAuth for this? What I have read about OAuth - it seems like it is used if I want to open my API to be used by third party apps. But here I just want to ensure secure transfer of data between API and my own apps.
Can somebody shed some light on this?
The main usage of OAuth is to make third-party apps authorized to access private resources of a user on a website without giving user credentials to the third-party app. For example, suppose that Twitter wants to get the list of contacts from your Yahoo account. The traditional way is to give your username and password to Twitter. But with OAuth, you give them a temporary token (called Access Token) which authorizes Twitter to access your contacts on Yahoo for a limited amount of time (until either this token expires or you, as the owner of private resource, explicitly revoke it).
That said, OAuth is not about securely transmitting data on the web. That's another story which is usually achieved using SSL. Even when you use OAuth, you have to use SSL alongside to make sure data is sent and received securely.
So in your case, you have to see what the API is used for. If it's public API which doesn't give any private data to the callers, there is no need to use OAuth. If the API is for accessing private resources of individual users however, You may consider using OAuth. If you opt to implement OAuth, you may allow other third-party apps to access your API in future without any concern.
Well a lot depends on how you are securing your API. Is your API open to public specially the post urls? If your data is not something which every user should see, then how are you checking the authentication of the user credentials?
Most the important thing is that we should avoid sharing the username and password over the wire to check for authentication all the time. This means, your API should not require username and password to validate if the user is valid. Which you can do by sending the username and password from mobile or device id or some other thing.
In such situation, the OAuth server comes to the rescue. Basically, on one URL a user will send his username and password to get his access token. Once that is acquired, we can use the access token to validate each request and take necessary actions.
You can refer the videos where I have implemented OAuth server in Laravel 5 using bshaffer which is one of the best OAuth library for any PHP framework to user. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vGXbWdtjls

Twitter API refuses my credentials

The twitter api keeps refusing my credentials, no matter what shared library I use. Is there any reason for this?
Twitter no longer allows BASIC AUTHENTICATION on its API. You need to do OAUTH authentication. This is most likely the problem you are having. If you need further help, you need to post some code, what library you are using, and exactly what part of the API you are trying to access.

Resources