ex)
refresh token: A
acess Token : B
user acquistion : A, B
If B expires, use A to reissue B
So if the attacker steals A, doesn't he get B?
According to the rfc official documentation, I heard that the client has A and B, but I don't know if that's true.
I don't understand the mechanism of using the correct refresh token.
How should I shape the implementation direction?
I logged in and finished issuing refresh tokens and access tokens.
main question : When accessing a protected page, when the access token expires and there is a refresh token, I don't know how to use it. I don't know if it's true that the problem of being stolen arises.
In order to get the access token and refresh token, most of the time you're using your username and password. the idea of using tokens is to use as last as possible in your credentials on transit to avoid credentials stolen.
the different in this two token in the ability to revoke the token, while in access token you're not able to revoke the token (if the token steals the attacker can do anything), as the refresh token (a.k.a - your session) can be revoked, to if this token stolen you can revoke it and no new access token will be generate.
best practice is to generate short expiration for access token (for the case it will be steals), long period for refresh token - in order not use your credentials a lot.
I'm using Google for auth (expo-auth-session/providers/google)
I can successfully login for the first time and fetch an access token and a refresh token. The refresh token will get stored in SecureStorage.
Now at this point, when the old access token is invalidated, I need to use the refresh token to get a new access token, but Expo's docs don't really provide any guidance on this part. I have checked their API quite thoroughly, but can't see anything that helps me retrieve a new access token with a refresh token.
Any guidance would be welcome.
The AuthSession library has a method specifically for refreshing tokens. It requires the clientId used to retrieve the token initially, so you can reuse that, the refreshToken which you have stored as well as a token endpoint.
const tokenResult = await AuthSession.refreshAsync({
clientId: "<your-client-id>>",
refreshToken: "<your-refresh-token>",
}, {
tokenEndpoint: "www.googleapis.com/oauth2/v4/token",
},
);
I wasn't able to test this myself as we use firebase and useIdTokenAuthRequest as a result, so I wasn't able to get my hands on a refreshToken to run it through that function - but the documentation of that method seems pretty solid.
I am facing a problem in a JWT scenario. When a user logs into the system through a web app, I generate a JWT access token (JWT auth) and a custom refresh token and save the refresh token in DB for later verification. But the problem is that when the same user logs in through the mobile app, it replaces the new refresh token in DB which invalidates the previous refresh token stored in the web's local storage.
I want to know how to deal with this problem. Do I need to create a separate table in DB for user refresh tokens and check them out or is there another better approach?
The best approach is to save more than one refresh token per user in a separate table with a foreign key to the user. That way you can have many refresh tokens associated with a user (and also other information about each refresh token, such as an expiry date) that can also help when implementing revocation (you'll have more information to present the user when choosing which token to revoke).
I'm building a react native app which uses the spotify web api. I'm using the authorization code flow to authorize a user. First I get a authorization code which can be used to obtain an access token and a refresh token. Everything works!
The problem is: an access token is only valid for a limited amount of time. That's where the refresh token comes in. I understand this concept, but I'm breaking my head about how to implement this.
Let's say a users opens the app, requests an access token and uses this for some time. Then, the user closes the app. After 15 minutes, the users opens the app again. The access token has now expired, so I need to request a new access token.
I've come op with several "solutions". Can someone point me to the correct solution?
Solution 1:
Every time the user opens the app, I request a new access token and use this. Problem: when the user uses the app longer than the valid time of the access token, I won't work anymore.
Solution 2:
I use the access token that's stored in the secure storage on every request. When a request comes back with 'access token invalid' (I don't know the exact error code but you guys know what I mean), I request a new access token with the stored refresh token, and then I send the previous command again (with the new access token). But my question here is: can I use some kind of "wrapper function" which checks the response of the request, and if the response is "access token invalid", it automatically requests a new access token and runs the previous request again.
I think certainly correct solution is solution 2,and i think its clear enough.
and for using solution 2 you need somthing like wrapper function,yes its intelligently.
so you should use interceptor:
what is interceptor ?
You can intercept requests or responses before they are handled by then or catch.
in link below there is a good example of implementing refresh token in axios interceptor:
https://gist.github.com/Godofbrowser/bf118322301af3fc334437c683887c5f
I agree that Solution 2 is the best, each time you do a request you can check to see if the Access Token has expired, and if it has then you can request a new Access Token using the Refresh Token as you mentioned and then make your request, in my own project I do this in a FormatRequestHeadersAsync method which calls a CheckAndRenewTokenAsync method where I perform the following check, here shown in C#:
if(AccessToken?.Refresh != null && (AccessToken.Expiration < DateTime.UtcNow))
{
AccessToken = await GetRefreshTokenAsync(
AccessToken.Refresh,
AccessToken.TokenType,
cancellationToken);
}
You can store the Access Token and the Refresh Token and then use something similar to this before you make each request to the API this will refresh your token and then you can store the new Access Token and the existing Refresh Token.
I'm referencing another SO post that discusses using refresh tokens with JWT.
JWT (JSON Web Token) automatic prolongation of expiration
I have an application with a very common architecture where my clients (web and mobile) talk to a REST API which then talks to a service layer and data layer.
I understand JWT token authentication, but I am a little confused at how I should use refresh tokens.
I want my JWT authentication to have the following properties:
JWT Token has an expiration of 2 hours.
The token is refreshed every hour by the client.
If the user token is not refreshed (user is inactive and the app is not open) and expires, they will need to log in whenever they want to resume.
I see a lot of people claiming to make this a better experience using the concept of a refresh token, however, I don't see the benefit of this. It seems like an added complexity having to manage it.
My questions are the following:
If I WERE to use a refresh token, wouldn't it still be beneficial to have a long term expiration for good practice on that token as well?
If I WERE to use a refresh token, would that token be persisted with the userId and/or JWT token?
When I update my token every 1 hour, how does this work? Will I want to create an endpoint that takes in my JWT token or my refresh token? Will this update the expiration date of my original JWT token, or create a new token?
Is there the need for a refresh token given these details? It seems that If the user is just using a JWT token to grab a new token (per the link above) then the refresh token is obsolete.
Let me come to your questions a little later down the line and start by actually discussing the whole purpose of a refresh token.
So the situation is:
The user opens the app and provides his login credentials. Now, most probably the app is interacting with a REST backend service. REST is stateless, there isn't a way to authorize access to the APIs. Hence, so far in the discussion, there is no way to check if an authorized user is accessing the APIs or is just some random requests coming through.
Now to be able to solve this problem, we need a way to know that the requests are coming from an authorized user. So, what we did was to introduce something called an access token. So now once the user is authenticated successfully, he is issued an access token. This token is supposed to be a long and highly random token (to ensure that it can not be guessed). This is where the JWT comes into the picture. Now you may/may not want to store any user-specific details in a JWT token. Ideally, you would want to just store very simple, extremely non-sensitive details in the JWT. The manipulation of the JWT hash to retrieve other user's details (IDOR etc.) is taken care of by JWT (the library being used) itself.
So, for now, our problem with authorized access is solved.
Now we talk of an attack scenario. Let's say using all of the above user Alice, using the app, has the authorized access token and now her app can make requests to all the APIs and retrieve the data as per her authorization.
Assume that SOMEHOW Alice loses the Access Token or put another way, an adversary, Bob, gets access to Alice's access token. Now Bob, despite being unauthorized, can make requests to all the APIs that Alice was authorized to.
SOMETHING WE IDEALLY DON'T WANT.
Now the solution to this problem is :
Either detect that there is something of this sort happening.
Reduce the attack window itself.
Using just the access token alone, it is hard to achieve condition 1 above, because be it Alice or Bob, it's the same authorized token being used and hence requests form the two users are not distinguishable.
So we try achieving 2 above and hence we add an expiration to the validity of the access token, say the access token is valid for 't' (short-lived) time.
How does it help? Well, even if Bob has the access token, he can use it only while it is valid. As soon as it expires, he will have to retrieve it again. Now, of course, you could say that he can get it the same way he got it the first time. But then again there's nothing like 100% security!
The above approach still has a problem and in some cases an unacceptable one. When the access token expires, it would require the user to enter his login credentials and obtain an authorized access token again, which at least in case of mobile apps, is a bad (not acceptable) user experience.
Solution: This is where the refresh token comes in. It is again a random unpredictable token that is also issued to the app along with the access token in the first place. This refresh token is a very long-lived special token, which makes sure that as soon as the access token expires, it requests the server for a new access token, thus removing the need for the user to re-enter his login credentials to retrieve a new authorized access token, once an existing one has expired.
Now you may ask, Bob can have access to the refresh token as well, similar to the way he compromised the access token. YES. He can. However, now it becomes easy to identify such an incidence, which was not possible in the case of an access token alone, and take the necessary action to reduce the damage done.
How?
For every authenticated user (in case of a mobile app, generally), a one to one mapped refresh token and access token pair is issued to the app. So at any given point in time, for a single authenticated user, there will be only one access token corresponding to a refresh token. Now assume that if Bob has compromised the refresh token, he would be using it to generate an access token (because access token is the only thing which is authorized to access resources through the APIs). As soon as Bob (attacker) requests with the newly generated access token because Alice's (genuine user) access token is still valid, the server would see this as an anomaly, because for a single refresh token there can be only one authorized access token at a time. Identifying the anomaly, the server would destroy the refresh token in question and along with it all, it's associated access tokens will also get invalidated. Thus preventing any further access, genuine or malicious, to any authorization requiring resources.
The user, Alice, would be required to once again authenticate with her credentials and fetch a valid pair of a refresh and access tokens.
Of course, you could still argue that Bob could once again get access to both refresh and access tokens and repeat the entire story above, potentially leading to a DoS on Alice, the actual genuine customer, but then again there is nothing like 100% security.
Also as a good practice, the refresh token should have an expiry, although a pretty long one.
I believe for this scenario you could work with the access token alone, making
life easier for your clients but keeping the security benefits of a refresh token.
This is how it would work:
When your user logs in with credentials (username/password) you return a
short-lived JWT. You also create a db record where you store:
JWT id
user id
IP address
user agent
a valid flag (defaults to TRUE)
createdAt
updatedAt
Your client submits the JWT in every request. As long as the JWT hasn't expired,
it has access to the resources. If the JWT expired, you refresh it
behind the scenes and return both the resource and an additional X-JWT header
with the new JWT.
When the client receives a response with an X-JWT header, it discards the
old JWT and uses the new one for future requests.
How refreshing the JWT works on the server
Look for the matching db record using the JWT id.
Check if the valid flag is still true, otherwise reject.
Optionally, you can compare the request IP address and user agent against
the stored IP address and user agent, and decide to reject if something looks
fishy.
Optionally, you can check the db record's createdAt or updatedAt fields, and
decide not to refresh if too much time has passed.
Update the updatedAt field in the db record.
Return the new JWT (which is basically a copy of the expired JWT, but with an extended expiration time).
This design would also give you the option to revoke all tokens for a user (for
example, if the user loses his phone or updates his password).
Benefits:
Your client never has to check expiration times or make refresh token
requests, all it does is check for an X-JWT header on responses.
You can add custom refresh logic based on IP address, user agent, max-token
age, or a combination of those.
You can revoke some or all tokens for a user.
If I WERE to use a refresh token, wouldn't it still be beneficial to have a long term expiration for good practice on that token as well?
Refresh Tokens are long-lived, Access Tokens are short-lived.
If I WERE to use a refresh token, would that token be persisted with the userId and/or JWT token?
It would be persisted as a separate token on the client, alongside JWT but not inside JWT. UserID/UID can be stored inside the JWT token itself.
When I update my token every 1 hour, how does this work? Will I want to create an endpoint that takes in my JWT token or my refresh token? Will this update the expiration date of my original JWT token, or create a new token?
Yes, you need a separate service that issues and refreshes token. It won't update the expiration of the existing JWT Token. A token is simply JSON field-value pairs that are base64 encoded. So changing the data, changes the output. The token also has the issue date, which will at the very least change on every fresh issue (refresh). So every token will be unique and new. The old tokens will auto-expire, hence you need expiration on all Access Tokens, otherwise they will linger around forever.
The other answer here states that old tokens get destroyed when you issue a new token. That's simply not the case. Tokens cannot be destroyed. In fact, you can harvest hundreds of tokens by constantly contacting the auth server and asking for new fresh tokens using your Refresh Token. Each of those Access Tokens will be valid till their expiry. So expiry is imperative, and it should be short.
Is there really the need for a refresh token given these details? It seems that If the user is just using a JWT token to grab a new token (per the link above) then the refresh token is obsolete.
JWT tokens have client claims. For example is_manager:true claim on a JWT token might allow access to manager-level features. Now if you decide to demote the user from manager to contractor, that won't take effect immediately. The user may still be using the old token. Finally when that expires, he hits the auth server to refresh his token. The auth server issues a new token without the managerial claim and the user won't be able to access managerial features any more. This creates a window during which the user's claims are not in sync with the server. This again explains why Access Tokens should be short-lived so sync'ing can happen often.
Essentially you are updating the authorization checks every 15 minutes, instead of checking them on every single request (which is how typical session-based auth works). If you want real-time permissions instead of every-15-minute refreshes, then JWT may not be a good fit.