I'm new to OAuth 2.0 and OpenIDConnect
I want to ask if is it necessary to implement OAuth 2.0 and OpenIDConnect for our login, register flow of our own created client application (mobile apps and server side app)?
Because I've been searching tutorial to implement login, register flow the best practice right now is using OAuth 2.0 and OpenIDConnect but their implementation is toward to securing our API against other people client application. Is this auth flow is just used to secure another people client application to access our API?
Thank you
OAuth 2.0 is both elegantly simple or extremely complex depending on your understanding of the technology and how to implement authorization.
I'm new to OAuth 2.0 and OpenIDConnect I want to ask if is it
necessary to implement OAuth 2.0 and OpenIDConnect for our login,
register flow of our own created client application (mobile apps and
server side app)?
No, it is not necessary to implement. There are many methods of authentication and authorization. OAuth is just one of the more popular methods.
A simpler and terrible method is to just implement username and passwords for your users. Simpler, in this case, is a relative term as now you need to worry about keeping usernames and passwords stored somewhere securely.
OAuth can be used to secure public access to your website, applications (REST endpoints), and more. OAuth can be used for server to server authorization. In the end, OAuth is just a method of creating a token that is presented to a service. The service verifies the access rights of that token and denies or proceeds with the request.
Authorization and Authentication are domains that require a lot of experience to implement correctly. There are many nuances to consider. That is why so many companies are breached, they do it wrong or implement weak methods. At one company I visited for an audit, I wrote down 10 usernames and passwords because everyone had yellow postit notes on their monitors. Even the best OAuth implementation will have problems with that level of security.
I am trying to understand differences between Federated Authentication and Delegated Authentication, But I am getting more and more confused.
Do we use SAML protocol ALWAYS for Federated Authentication? or What?
Is it possible to use OpenID Connect (or OAuth) for both authentication methods?
Do we need to have Trusted connection between two domains to be able to have Delegated or Federated authentication?
Do we always use SAML for Partners and OpenID Connect (or OAuth) for Customers?
I will be grateful if somebody explains different steps for these two authentication methods between two domains (Partners and Enterprise).
A difference between the two methods are:
A delegated solution means that one site is simply outsourcing its
authentication needs to another pre-selected site. If your site uses
Facebook Connect, you are delegating your authentication facilities to
Facebook. Visitors to your site cannot use any other accounts, only
accounts from the vendors you have pre-selected.
A federated solution means that visitors to your site can use any
account they have, as long as it is compatible. It makes no difference
to the site which account is being used, as long as it can
interoperate. At its core, OpenID is a federated solution because its
most important feature is the ability to use any OpenID account with
any OpenID-enabled service.
Source
Now to your questions:
Not only SAML but OpenId Connect, OAtuh2 or even others protocols can be used as well.
Yes. Just note that delegated solution is less secure.
Before you put me down for asking too basic a question without doing any homework, I'd like to say that I have been doing a lot of reading on these topics, but I'm still confused.
My needs seem simple enough. At my company, we have a bunch of Ruby on Rails applications. I want to build an SSO authentication service which all those applications should use.
Trying to do some research on how to go about doing this, I read about CAS, SAML and OAuth2. (I know that the "Auth" in OAuth stands for authorization, and not authentication, but I read enough articles saying how OAuth can be used for authentication just fine - this is one of them.)
Could someone tell me in simple terms what these 3 are? Are they alternatives (competing)? Is it even right to be comparing them?
And there are so many gems which all seem to be saying very similar stuff:
https://github.com/rubycas/rubycas-server and https://github.com/rubycas/rubycas-client
https://github.com/nbudin/devise_cas_authenticatable
https://github.com/onelogin/ruby-saml
CASino and https://github.com/rbCAS/casino-activerecord_authenticator
And I am sure there are hundreds of OAuth related gems.
I just want a separate Rails application which handles all the authentication for my other Rails apps.
Note: I do not want to allow users to use their Google / Facebook accounts to login. Our users already have accounts on our site. I want them to be able to login using that account once and be able to access all our apps without signing in again. Signing out in any app should sign them out of all apps.
UPDATE
I have come across these two OAuth solutions:
http://dev.mikamai.com/post/110722727899/oauth2-on-rails
http://blog.yorkxin.org/posts/2013/11/05/oauth2-tutorial-grape-api-doorkeeper-en/
They seem to be describing something very similar to what I want. But I haven't found any guide / blog post / tutorial showing how to do this with SAML / CAS.
Suggestions welcome.
UPDATE 2
More details about our use-case.
We do not have any existing SAML architecture in place. Primarily, it is going to be OUR users (registered directly on our website) who are going to be accessing all our applications. In the future, we may have third-party (partner) companies calling our APIs. We may also have users from these third-party (partner) companies (registered on their websites) accessing our apps.
CAS-Server:
A stand-alone central login page where the user enters their credentials (i.e. their username and password).
CAS supports the standardized SAML 1.1 protocol primarily to support
attribute release to clients and single sign-out.
(a table in a SQL database, ActiveDirectory/LDAP, Google accounts, etc.)
Full compatibility with the open, multi-platform CAS protocol (CAS clients are implemented for a wide range of platforms, including PHP, various Java frameworks, .NET, Zope, etc.)
Multi-language localization -- RubyCAS-Server automatically detects the user's preferred language and presents the appropriate interface.
SAML :
Security Assertion Markup Language is an XML-based, open-standard data format for exchanging authentication and authorization data between parties, in particular, between an identity provider and a service provider.
SAML authorization is a two step process and you are expected to implement support for both.
OAuth 2.0:
The OAuth 2.0 authorization framework enables a third-party
application to obtain limited access to an HTTP service, either on
behalf of a resource owner by orchestrating an approval interaction
between the resource owner and the HTTP service, or by allowing the
third-party application to obtain access on its own behalf.
Important Note :
SAML has one feature that OAuth2 lacks: the SAML token contains the user identity information (because of signing). With OAuth2, you don't get that out of the box, and instead, the Resource Server needs to make an additional round trip to validate the token with the Authorization Server.
On the other hand, with OAuth2 you can invalidate an access token on the Authorization Server, and disable it from further access to the Resource Server.
Both approaches have nice features and both will work for SSO. We have proved out both concepts in multiple languages and various kinds of applications. At the end of the day OAuth2 seems to be a better fit for our needs (since there isn't an existing SAML infrastructure in place to utilize).
OAuth2 provides a simpler and more standardized solution which covers
all of our current needs and avoids the use of workarounds for
interoperability with native applications.
When should I use which?
1.If your usecase involves SSO (when at least one actor or participant is an enterprise), then use SAML.
2.If your usecase involves providing access (temporarily or permanent) to resources (such as accounts, pictures, files etc), then use OAuth.
3.If you need to provide access to a partner or customer application to your portal, then use SAML.
4.If your usecase requires a centralized identity source, then use SAML (Identity provider).
5.If your usecase involves mobile devices, then OAuth2 with some form of Bearer Tokens is appropriate.
Reference 1,Reference 2,Reference 3
If you need to authenticate for LDAP or ActiveDirectory then a solution like one of the CAS gems you mentioned above is right for you (RubyCAS, CASino).
If you can afford it, one of the commercial vendors (like Okta) is your best option because they will stay on top of security patches and manage your authentication needs for you. In particular, if you have to support ActiveDirectory, they've already implemented it.
OAuth is most useful for third party authentication, though it can do SSO. So if you wanted to support Google / Facebook logins or be a third party authenticator then it's a great choice. Since you don't want to support Google / Facebook then OAuth is probably not what you want.
If you are only intending to use HTTP POST for your SSO needs then the ruby-saml gem could be the way to go. You would have to implement your own Identity provider and add a service provider component to all your websites (possibly in the form of a gem.) Part of what you would need is a rails api to act as your identity provider. This gem helps support writing API's in rails.
EDIT
You mention the possibility that future third party users might be logging on to your site. This changes your calculus away from rolling your own ruby-saml solution.
The best way to share your authentication API is to implement an OAuth layer. Doorkeeper is a popular solution and is fast becoming the standard for Rails authentication. It's community support, flexibility and ease of use make it the best way to go for a consumable authentication API.
Railscast for implementing doorkeeper
Anjan.
I've used CAS and OAuth in my work. Here are some of my opinions, and hope to help.
Basically
Both CAS and SAML aim to solve SSO situation. And CAS is a service or an authentication system, which can support SAML protocol.
OAuth aims to solve authorization and authentication.
And in practice,
Both CAS and SAML act as an gateway in front of a group of applications which belong to one organization. Just like your case.
OAuth is used to authorize and authenticate between different organizations.
Just my thoughts, and hope to hear more voices.
We have used CAS and SAML in our architecture (Mobile App, Online Portal, and MicroServices) and both are used for different purpose.
Our Online Portal is like online banking that runs in public domain and has to be secure. We don't want to store password and other secure token's in the DB of the online portal, therefore, we use CAS for authentication and authorization. During registration, when user chooses the password, we store the password in CAS and store corresponding token in the DB of Portal
When user login next time, User enters the user name and password in Portal. Portal fetches the token corresponding to user from DB and sends User_name, password, and token to CAS for validation.
But, in case user has already logged in into one application and we redirect user to our another application then we dont want to user to enter username and password again for second application. We use SAML to solve this. First application shares user details with SAML server and gets token in return. First application passes the token to second application. Second application sends token to SAML server to get user details and on success lands user to desired page. Our first application can be Mobile App and second can be Portal in the scenario of App2Web.
Since you have got lot of answers for this question, I would like to suggest you an identity product that can be cater these kind of all protocol in one hand with lot of authentication and user management features. You can just try WSO2 Identity Server version for this.
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
We're building a new app that requires access to specific customer data, and OAuth appears to be absolutely perfect for our requirements - long-lived access tokens, ability to grant access to specific resources or scopes, and so on. We are not looking for 'log in with Facebook' type capabilities here; we want to expose a single, specific OAuth authentication server based on our existing customer login database, and allow web and native apps to authenticate users via this endpoint.
I've been looking at the DotNetOpenAuth code samples, and it appears that all of the OAuth 2 examples use OpenID to perform the initial authentication and then use OAuth to actually authorise access to resources.
My understanding is that you can use a 'no-op authorisation' to perform the initial authentication, allowing you to use OAuth2 for the whole process; since we don't want to support federated authentication, OpenID doesn't actually offer anything, and so I'd rather stick to a single protocol for simplicity if possible.
Is there a good example anywhere of a pure OAuth2 authentication server built using .NET? Have I misunderstood the example code supplied with DotNetOpenAuth? Or is OpenID still required for the initial authentication phase?
There's no coupled relation between OAuth2.0 and OpenId.
You can implement your custom login strategy in your OAuth2.0 implementation.
Since you gonna be the "Resource Owner"(as far as I understood your application owns the user base), you can simply replace in the DNOA authorization server sample the openid login with the standard asp.net login.
OAuth2.0 protocol simply needs to verify a user identity in order to emit an access token: how that identity will be verified is totally up to you.