ClientSiteA.com, ClientSiteB.com, ....
(client domains are unknown to us)
OurServer.com
(contains all the user credentials)
We need users to be able to login on OurServer.com (using JavaScript) on any client site. The login form must reside on client sites. So I am envisioning an ajax call sent to OurServer.com containing username (from any client site). If the username is logged in, let them do stuff, if not show them a login form. This login form will send their username/password to the server and log them in.
Is this possible? I've been reading about SAML, but I'm seeing having the login form on the client sites could be a problem. I've also been reading about oAuth. I'm pretty lost. Can anyone give me some guidance.
I don't think it is easier to have the same UI repeated over multiple sites, this makes maintenance much more difficult.
On the other hand, if there is an explicit link for users to login or they are automatically redirected when accessing restricted sites then there is NO need for this awkward requirement. Awkward - because it makes it tricky to use existing sso protocols.
Answering your question - OAuth2 lets you exchange username/passwords for access tokens. It is called the Resource Owner Password Credential flow.
Trying to convince you that this is not a good idea - not all OAuth2 providers support this flow, from what I remember Google doesn't. Instead, they support flows which redirect client to their login page where they can perform just anything your client application is not aware of like:
multifactor authentication
additional confirmation pages for explicit resource access approval
These additional steps of authentication are just not possible in the simple username/password flow.
Related
I am confused about the different login methods and the impacts on the user experience.
I would like to do native mobile app login on iOS, that means the user is not redirected toward the web page (or in app browser tab) to login. For example : All banking applications (Ex: N26) the login method is always the same : User enter his login / pwd and then he connects.
However, when I see the "Best practice login app for mobile" I can see they use authenticate + authorization code flow with PKCE. But using this method, my mobile app has to be redirected to the authorization server (Like when we want to connect with google).
So my questions are :
Is is possible to do native login using authorization code flow with PKCE without opening an in app browser tab ?
In terms of security, authorization code flow is better than native ? If yes, why all banking mobile applications are not using it ?
if the authorization server is the same than the resources server, is it possible to not have this redirection for the login ?
For now, my server use OpenID, tomorrow maybe OpenIDConnect.
Thank you for your answer :D.
Context
N26 as well as most banking apps do not support Single-Sign-On (SSO).
Auth code flow + PKCE is a way of securely having your user login with SSO, usually using a well known Identity Provider (IdP) as Google. Then, assuming your selected IdP follows the OIDC specs, you will be able to receive an idToken which will represent the user who just logged in and some of her details (called token claims) like her email, name, etc.
Answers
Auth code flow + PKCE is related only when you use OIDC SSO, not with native login.
In order to implement a native login you would have to be the "authority" who keeps the data required to authenticate users like email, password etc. Otherwise, Google (or any other IdP) is responsible for that. SSO provides better UX (as long as the redirect to the IdP is not poorly designed) and users prefer it since they are usually already logged in to their IdP, thus they do not have to remember and type credentials. However, the reason that lots of banks do not use SSO is that they do not trust Google. If Google gets compromised, the malicious party would be able to issue tokens that would allow them to impersonate anyone. Same for availability. If Google goes offline for some reason, users will not be able to login. I guess banks believe that they can provide better security and availability guarantees on their own.
Again, you need the redirection only when using SSO OIDC. If you are not using that, and end up using a native login no redirection will be needed. That being said, it is a good practice too keep your authentication server separate to your back end.
I can't help but think I've implemented Open ID slightly incorrectly, but I also cannot find why I've done the implementation the way I have is bad or not.
Scenario:
Website - Used forms authentication before being updated to use OWIN. Forms auth has been stripped out.
Website now supports OpenId to Okta. This is being implemented for a large company of our users to facilitate their logins. This is functional.
The method I use for the site models how Microsoft does logins. On email domain detection, we redirect the user to the login page for their domain. In this case, Okta. We receive the callback, and look up the user in our existing data, and generate a cookie based on our existing data (or create a new user account if they don't have one).
Essentially, just using Okta to confirm they are a valid user, and then we log them in with our user data. We foresee doing this for other companies as well.
Problem:
I have a desktop (WPF) client that requires a login to our website. This talks to API's that already exist using an auth key/token system we built many years ago. Ideally, we do something similar. Use Okta to verify the user is a user of that system, then generate a token that can be used for these API's.
Here is where I'm not sure I've done this appropriately.
The desktop client calls an API endpoint on our site with the email domain the user entered. We verify the user's domain is allowed to use SSO, and if so, we issue back a challenge endpoint for the client to call. This challenge endpoint is then called by the desktop client to launch the users default browser.
This challenge endpoint is an endpoint on OUR website, that essentially triggers the challenge to the IdP. After login, a callback is called on OUR website, to process the auth response. We verify the user's account is valid, and get the refresh token from the response. With the refresh token, and an identifier of the user, this data is then sent back to the desktop client using localhost:randomPort so the client can consume the refresh token and identitifer. (Note that I do encrypt the refresh token and identifier's before returning them to the client)
This refresh token is then POSTed to OUR website, along with their identifier (so we can identify the IdP we should call), then use an OIDC client to verify the refresh token is still valid. If the refresh token is still valid, we generate an app token and return it.
Is there a glaring issue with how this is implemented that I'm not seeing? How can I do this differently?
You seem to be missing the role of an Authorization Server (AS) that you own, to manage connections to other systems and to issue tokens to your apps.
You seem to have some good separation and to be doing quite a few things well - eg you are using your own tokens rather than foreign Okta tokens. The main issue is likely to be growing the system.
PREFERRED BEHAVIOUR
An AS should result in simpler code and a system that is easier to extend:
You can add new authentication methods quickly
This should involve just adding a connection (eg Okta) to your AS
Doing so requires zero code changes in your UIs and APIs
Your UIs just use standard OpenID Connect flows and call AS endpoints, regardless of the authentication method used
Your APIs just verify tokens issued by the AS, then authorize requests, regardless of the authentication method used
Some scripting is needed in the AS, but typically this is small.
FEATURES
In terms of what an AS should do for you, have a browse of the Curity Concepts Pages. I work there, and we try to write about the science of OAuth and the common extensibility features software companies need.
CHOOSING YOUR MOMENTS
Integrating an AS and getting past all the blocking issues is a gradual journey though, and involves learning. So it requires choosing your moments, spikes and getting buy in from your stakeholders.
The main objective should always be simple and standard code in your apps, that is easy to scale. OAuth and the Authorization Server give you design patterns that help with this.
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.
We currently have a typical forms authentication setup in our organisation; with a login page located at something like account/login. We want to retain this but also want to start securing some of our APIs with OAUTH2 ; essentially we are the provider.
From reading a fair bit about the subject Microsoft's OWIN OAUTH implementation moving forward isn't supported (e.g. vNext) and doesnt support all the flows with OAUTH2. Thinktecture's identityserver3 seems to be the "standard" and most complete solution there is currently.
I cant seem to find an example of using identityserver3 with an existing app that requires forms authentication.
We would be looking at using it in two different ways; one using the implicit flow using javascript where we allow a third party site to call our API once the user has logged in to us (using the forms auth) and the user has allowed the client to access specific scopes.
The other use case, I think , would use the authorisation code flow ; the client would be requesting this so it can auto login (much like a login with Facebook - but login with X company) or be already logged in if logged in our site.
Any help with these scenarios would be most appreciated.
I think it will not be possible to switch your app to OAuth without changing your existing login.
I would suggest you use Identity server with custom user store(https://identityserver.github.io/Documentation/docsv2/advanced/userService.html) to use your current user database. That way your existing login accounts will be used by the identity server.
You can then secure your APIs with OAuth using the Identity server. You might need to change the way your current app call the APIs too. This means users of the current app will be redirected to identity server's login page. You can brand your login pages using custom views to make it appear similar to the curent login page (https://identityserver.github.io/Documentation/docsv2/advanced/customizingViews.html)
Currently we are not using OAuth with our apps but we are working on making the shift, we have direct login and capture the user/pass that was entered and store those. We then turn around and use the stored credentials for a feature that allows the user to open a record within Salesforce.com, we pass the user/pass in to the login endpoint along with a starting URL to the specific record, this works great and is a well liked feature as it is a simple SSO from the App to Salesforce.com where the user can see all data that may not be visible within the app.
Moving to OAuth 2.0 and using the standard webflow, we no longer can capture the user/pass, which is actually a good thing as far as security is concerned. We would however like to keep this functionality, is there anyway of SSO'ing into Salesforce.com by passing along one of the OAuth tokens or some kind of sesson id?
After reading more and thinking about what OAuth accomplishes I feel like this probably isn't possible being that the tokens obtained are meant to be used only with the API and not with the front end system. I hope that I am wrong though and there is a way to login to the front end using these tokens.
EDIT
Ok I am editing to hopefully make this more clear. Currently user's authenticate using the login() API method with their user/pass, we store this user/pass locally (not ideal). We then sync a subset of data that the users can access anytime within the app, being that it is a subset, we have a feature to "SSO" to the Salesforce.com front-end. This simply opens Salesforce.com in a web-view (UIWebView) using the URL https://ns8.salesforce.com/?pw=PASSWORD&un=username#example.com&startURL=/recordId. This will log us in to Salesforce.com and open the specified record.
Moving forward we want to use OAuth 2.0 with the web flow so that we aren't handling the user/pass and so that we do not have to deal with Security Tokens or opening specific IP ranges to allow login without a Security Token.
With that said, is there anyway to use the tokens/credentials received from the OAuth authentication to open Salesforce.com, automatically log the user in, and goto a specific record?
I may have mis-used "single sign on" before, but in a sense, this simulates an SSO from our App to Salesforce.com, in that our users can touch a single button within the app and be logged in to the Salesforce.com web interface.
When you request an OAuth token, you can specify what scope it has, options include api only (the original type of tokens), or other options which include the ability to use the token with the UI pages. (see the scope parameter detail in the help). One of the still missing peices is a way to bootstrap the UI with that token when all you can do is tell a browser/webview to goto a URL, but a widely used (but unsupported) way is via frontdoor.jsp, e.g. you'd open https://{instance}/secur/frontdoor.jsp?sid={the_Access_token}&retURL={optional_relative_url_to_open} remember to URLEncode the 2 values.
So I think you are saying your application uses the SFDC username and password to just authenticate to retrieve a record from SFDC to display in your app?
IF this is correct - which I think it is - then you could just use the standard Salesforce Single Sign On system to authenticate. There is a guide here which outlines the process of setting up a SAML SSO system with Pat Patterson writing an interesting feature on how the security system works here. He has also written a great blog post on DeveloperForce here about the nitty details of OAuth in general for Force.com and not just the SAML setup. I have used the OAuth system in an iPad app against SFDC and it works quickly and easily. I can't see why your system should be unable to use the protocol as you desire.
Direct access into Salesforce is a key benefit of SSO and definitely provided. I'm not sure where you read that SSO in Salesforce is API only. From the SSO PDF pbattisson linked for you:
With single sign-on, users only need to memorize a single password to
access both network resources or external applications and Salesforce.
When accessing Salesforce from inside the corporate network, users are
logged in seamlessly, without being prompted to enter a username or
password. When accessing Salesforce from outside the corporate
network, users' corporate network login works to log them in. With
fewer passwords to manage, system administrators receive fewer
requests to reset forgotten passwords.
OAuth 1 & 2 are both supported, though I'm a fan of OAuth 2 since 1 has really finicky additional steps involving the order of parameters and their encoding sequences. I recently wrote an Apex-Twitter integration and quickly realized it wasn't going to be as easy as Facebook, which uses OAuth 2.0.
But in your case it sounds like you just want to provide users with the ability to actually login to Salesforce and go to a specific landing page once authenticated. This is definitely doable.
Good luck!