Workflow to implement Google OAuth2.0 - authentication

I'm trying to implement Google authentication for my app and the below is the workflow I'm trying to set up.
First, user will authenticate with Google and obtain an access token.
User will make requests with this token to backend services.
Backend services will check with Google to validate these token
Once validated, backend services will send information requested by client back to users
And I have a couple question around it:
Is this the correct way to implement it?
How to avoid check with Google for every single request between Backend and Frontend?

It's sort of the correct way. It depends on the details. If I understand correctly, you are in control of the front and backend (these are both your applications). If this is the case, then you would rather use Google services only to authenticate the user (so use an OpenID Connect flow to get an ID token to verify the user's identity). After that, you would have your backend either issue an access token or establish a session with your frontend. Then you wouldn't have to ask Google for the token's validity every time someone makes a request to your backend.
An access token that you get from Google, Facebook, etc. is meant to be used with their APIs. You could use it to authorize access to your own backend, but you then have to call Google on every request to verify the token. You are also tightly coupled to Google's details of the access token usage — what scopes are available, what data is returned with the token, expiration times, etc.
If the access token is a JWT, then you can verify it on your own in your backend. You don't have to call the issuer every time. But, if I remember correctly, Google issues opaque tokens, so this is not the way to go here.
To sum up. If you're in control of the front and back end, then authenticate with Google, then start a session between your applications. This will be simpler to maintain and also safer, as you wouldn't have to handle tokens in the browser.

Related

Who generates JWT when using Google OpenID Connect authnentication for my ASP.NET Core Web API app?

I am building an ASP.NET Core 6 Web API application for mobile clients (and maybe later SPA JS app). The application should have sign-in with Google option. I also want to add my own app's custom sign up and sign in options that would also be based on JWT authentication and not cookie.
I understand that for my custom sign in flow my app will generated JWT that will be sent to the client.
But I have few questions how that works when user signs-in with its Google account:
who's responsibility is to generate the JWT when user signs-in with its Google account? Is that responsibility of Google or mine application? I don't want Google to return JWT to the client in the cookie.
Then when client is authenticated with Google, and sends requests to my application, how can my application validate JWT token it gets?
When user signs in with Google for the first time, should I automatically register that user in my application (I am using Identity framework) by taking claim values (email) from the JWT? What is the general practice here?
I am trying to understand these processes and flows so sample code is not necessary (but I do welcome it).
Ad.1. Normally, in a larger system, you would have an authorization server (AS) that would handle user authentication and the issuance of tokens. Your clients would contact only the AS, and the AS will be able to provide the user with different forms of authentication: e.g., through your website's password or through Google. The AS is the single point of issuing tokens to your clients. It can issue tokens regardless of the authentication method used. So it then doesn't matter whether the user authenticated with Google or a password, the client will still get the same access token.
Ad.2. When the AS issues token to your client, then you don't have any problems validating that token. The client doesn't care if the user authenticated with Google or not, it's not relevant in this case.
If you decide to skip using an AS and let the client receive tokens directly from Google, then you can still verify them. An ID token is a JWT and can be easily validated with a JWT library using verification keys provided by Google. Access tokens returned by Google are opaque tokens (If I remember correctly), and you need to check whether Google exposes an endpoint to verify them.
Ad.3. That is the general practice. When the user authenticates with Google and you notice that you don't have that user's data in your system, then you take the information from Google's ID token and create a user entry in your system.

What's the proper way to implement a "static" authorization token feature using OIDC (or OAuth2)

I am exploring possible solutions for creating something like "API Keys" to consume my API. The goal is to allow for users to generate one or many "API Keys" from the web app and use the static generated key from the CLI app.
The web app and the client app are already using standard OIDC with JWT tokens for authentication and authorization using RBAC (role-based access control). The CLI app can already authenticate the user through the standard browser flow (redirects the user to the browser to authenticate and exchange the token back to the client).
The "API Keys" solution I am trying to achieve should have some fine-grained options where it won't authenticate as the user, but will authorize the client on behalf of the user (something like the GitHub Personal Access Token).
To me it seems like a "solved problem" as multiple services provide this kind of feature and my goal is to do it the most standard way possible using the Oauth2/OIDC protocols but I can't find details on what parts of the protocols should be used.
Can anybody provide any guidance on how it is supposed to be done using the Oauth2/OIDC entities?
Can I achieve it by only using Role-based access control or do I need Resource-based access control?
It went through the path of creating a new client for each "API Key" created, but it didn't feel right to create so many clients in the realm.
Any guidance or links to any materials are appreciated.
Can anybody provide any guidance on how it is supposed to be done
using the Oauth2/OIDC entities?
OIDC is based on OAUth 2.0 so after user login you have id tokens, access token and refresh token on the backend side. To generate new access token without asking user for authentication data you should use refresh token: https://oauth.net/2/refresh-tokens/
Can I achieve it by only using Role-based access control or do I need
Resource-based access control?
resource-based access control is more flexible solution here, but if you business requirement is not complex, then role based might be enough.
It went through the path of creating a new client for each "API Key"
created, but it didn't feel right to create so many clients in the
realm.
It is one application so you should use one client with specific configuration for access token and roles/permissions for users.
Update:
We can use GitHub as an example:
User is authenticated during login
for OIDC code is exchanged for id token, access token and refresh token
session for user is set for web browser
User can request access token
in GitHub authenticated user can request github.com/settings/personal-access-tokens/new endpoint
request is accepted, because user is authenticated based on session
backend service responsible for returning access token can obtain new access token using refresh token from point 1.
access token is returned to GitHub user
To call your API in an OAuth way, CLI users must authenticate periodically. Resulting access tokens can be long lived, as for GitHub keys, if you judge that secure enough. The access token returned can be used exactly like an API key. There may be a little friction here between usability and security.
CONSOLE FLOW
The classic flow for a console app is to use the Native Apps Desktop Flow from RFC8252. This involves the user interactively signing in using the code flow, then receiving the response on a loopback URL. It is an interactive experience, but should only be required occasionally, as for GitHub tokens.
API KEYS
The access token returned is sent in the authorization header and you can use it as an API key. Access tokens can use a reference token format. to make them shorter and confidential, to prevent information disclosure. These will be more natural in a CLI.
API AUTHORIZATION
When your API is called, it must receive access tokens containing scopes and claims, to identify the user. This will enable you to authorize correctly and lock down permissions.
{
sub: 586368,
scope: repos_write,
topic: mobile,
subscription_level: silver
exp: ?
}
TOKEN REFRESH
Sometimes CLI access tokens are long lived, for convenience. A more secure option is for the CLI to use token refresh. It can then store a refresh token in OS secure storage, then renew access tokens seamlessly. My blog post has some screenshots on how this looks, and a desktop app that does not require login upon restart. The CLI needs to deal with expired access tokens and handle 401 responses.
DYNAMIC CLIENT REGISTRATION
Some developer portal scenarios use DCR. It is another option in your security toolbox. It could potentially enable a silent client per CLI user:
User runs a standard authentication flow with a DCR scope
This returns an access token that enables client registration
The resulting token is used to register a new client
This could potentially be a client ID and client secret used in a CLI
Afterwards, the user and client are bound together. Probably not immediately relevant, but worth knowing about.

Oauth 2.0 and OpenId Connect for REST API authentication and authorization

After having read books and watched videos on OAuth, OIDC, PKCE, JWT, etc. I still have no idea on how to use all of these for my app (a secured REST API).
My use case is fairly simple. I want my users to be able to login with Google, Amazon, Okta or whatever and the only info I want from them is the email address they used to login, nothing else. After their first login, their email will be added to a database and in a separate process I will grant them some permissions (what resources they can access).
So let's imagine a standard authorization code flow and let's fast forward to the access token part. The redirect URI has been called, we are in my client (somewhere is my backend/API) where I retrieve an access token. At this point the user has been successfully authenticated.
But what now ?
I don't care about Google anymore (do I still need the access token ?), but I still want to check if the user can use my API for each request and is able to access the API resources depending on his permissions.
How do I keep the user authenticated (for like 2h only) and check his permissions ? A session Cookie, a Token or something else with an expiration time ?
Do I need my own authorization server to check if the user has access to the resource he is requesting ?
Considering my requirements, do I need PKCE if the API is accessed from an SPA or a mobile app ? Wouldn't the authorization code flow be enough - the SPA or mobile app retrieve an authorization code, then call the callback endpoint from the API ?
And the more important question is, do I ask the right questions or am I completely off track and it's not how it's supposed to work ?
In terms of your questions:
Your API needs an access token on every request
A stateless session is managed by sending the access token on every request
It is recommended to use your own Authorization Server that manages redirecting to social providers - this will simplify your UIs and APIs which only need to handle one type of token - also this means you are in control of the tokens your apps use
Yes - use PKCE for public clients - the Authorization Server and UI security libraries will handle this for you
Your use case is not simple at all on a technical level and requires a lot of understanding. A good starting point is to understand these aspects:
Role of UI and what a coded solution looks like
Role of Authorization Server and its configuration
Role of API and what a coded solution looks like
Open Id Connect messages used
These links of mine may be useful for browsing:
Initial code sample and tutorial
Message Workflow including PKCE
Given an access token, both the UI and API can potentially get the email via step 12 in the second link to lookup user info.

REST API authentication for web app and mobile app

I'm having some trouble deciding how to implement authentication for a RESTful API that will be secure for consumption by both a web app and a mobile app.
Firstly, I thought to investigate HTTP Basic Authentication over HTTPS as an option. It would work well for a mobile app, where the username and password could be stored in the OS keychain securely and couldn't be intercepted in transit since the request would be over HTTPS. It's also elegant for the API since it'll be completely stateless. The problem with this is for the web app. There won't be access to such a keychain for storing the username and password, so I would need to use a cookie or localStorage, but then I'm storing the user's private details in a readily accessible place.
After more research, I found a lot of talk about HMAC authentication. The problem I see with this approach is there needs to be a shared secret that only the client and server knows. How can I get this per-user secret to a particular user in the web app, unless I have an api/login endpoint which takes username/password and gives the secret back to store in a cookie? to use in future requests. This is introducing state to the API however.
To throw another spanner into the works, I'd like to be able to restrict the API to certain applications (or, to be able to block certain apps from using the API). I can't see how this would be possible with the web app being completely public.
I don't really want to implement OAuth. It's probably overkill for my needs.
I feel as though I might not be understanding HMAC fully, so I'd welcome an explanation and how I could implement it securely with a web app and a mobile app.
Update
I ended up using HTTP Basic Auth, however instead of providing the actual username and password every request, an endpoint was implemented to exchange the username and password for an access key which is then provided for every authenticated request. Eliminates the problem of storing the username and password in the browser, but of course you could still fish out the token if you had access to the machine and use it. In hindsight, I would probably have looked at OAuth further, but it's pretty complicated for beginners.
You should use OAuth2. Here is how:
1) Mobile App
The mobile app store client credentials as you state yourself. It then uses "Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant" (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-4.3) to send those credentials. In turn it gets a (bearer) token it can use in the following requests.
2) Web site
The website uses "Authorization Code Grant" (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-4.1):
Website sees unauthorized request and redirects browser to HTML-enabled autorization endpoint in the REST api.
User authenticates with REST service
REST site redirects user back to website with access token in URL.
Website calls REST site and swaps access token to authorization token.
Here after the website uses the authorization token for accessing the REST service (on behalf of the end-user) - usually by including the token as a "bearer" token in the HTTP Authorization header.
It is not rocket science but it does take some time to understand completely.
3) Restricting API access for certain applications
In OAuth2 each client is issued a client ID and client secret (here "client" is your mobile app or website). The client must send these credentials when authorizing. Your REST service can use this to validate the calling client
I resolved this for my own API quite easily and securely without the need to expose any client credentials.
I also split the problem into 2 parts. API authentication - is this a valid request from a recognised entity (website or native app). API authorisation, is that entity allowed to use this particular endpoint and HTTP verb.
Authorisation is coded into the API using an access control list and user permissions and settings that are set up within the API code, configuration and database as required. A simple if statement in the API can test for authorisation and return the appropriate response (not authorised or the results of processing the API call).
Authentication is now just about checking to see if the call is genuine. To do this I issue self signed certificates to clients. A call to the API is made from their server whenever they want - typically when they generate their first page (or when they are performing their own app login checks). This call uses the certificates I have previously provided. If on my side I am happy the certificate is valid I can return a nonce and a time limited generated API key. This key is used in all subsequent calls to other API endpoints, in the bearer header for example, and it can be stored quite openly in an HTML form field or javascript variable or a variable within an app.
The nonce will prevent replay attacks and the API key can be stolen if someone wants - they will not be able to continue using after it expires or if the nonce changes before they make the next call.
Each API response will contain the next nonce of if the nonce doesn't match it will return an authentication error. In fact of the nonce doesn't match I kill the API key too. This will then force a genuine API user to reauthenticate using the certificates.
As long as the end user keeps those certificates safe and doesn't expose the method they use to make the initial authentication call (like making it an ajax request that can be replayed) then the API's are nice and secure.
One way of addressing the issue of user authentication to the API is by requesting an authentication token from the API when the user logs in. This token can then be used for subsequent requests. You've already touched on this approach - it's pretty sound.
With respect to restricting certain web apps. You'll want to have each web app identify itself with each request and have this authentication carried out inside your API implementation. Pretty straight forward.

REST API Authentication (maintaning an authenticated state)

I am developing a REST API. Currently I am trying to make it minimally secure. I am asking this question because most of the posts I found about this subject were quite old.
For authentication I found this schemes:
Basic authentication
AWS authentication protocol
OpenID
OpenID Connect
OAuth pseudo authentication
Basic Authentication and AWS authentication maintain the requests authenticated after a firts authentication because they keep sending signed requests.
I don't understand how the OpenID and OAuth authentication maintain a (second) request autehnticated? Do I need to check the access token with the OAuth/OpenID server per each request? How does this protects the REST API from receiving requests that have been altered?
Any other schemes that you recommend, advices or reading material about the subject are always welcome.
I'd talk about OAuth here
i) You create a web app and want to use google's OAuth API's.
ii) You register your app here and get credentials.
iii) Now, in the app you'd use Google's SDK to open the login page, enter your credentials and Google would verify it and send you access tokens and refresh tokens.
iv) You would make REST call to google's APIs with the access token and fetch user's data.
Now, coming to the question you asked -
An access token generally lives for 1 hour. Yes, any authenticated calls that you need to make to any of Google's API within one hour could be made with the same access token.
There is another type of token - the Refresh Token. At any time, your app can hit the provider's token exchange endpoint and exchange the refresh token for - refresh token + access token pair.
Now again, you have an access token that will help you for one hour and a refresh token that can be exchanged any time.
Refresh tokens live for as long as you want, till the time the user explicitly revokes permission to your app. (Tells Google that it doesn't not want you to access his resources!)
OAuth would make your REST API secure by ensuring that only authenticated and authorized clients can hit your API. But generally, OAuth is only used when there's a situation where a third party client needs access to a user's resource!