This question is has a lot in common to the previous question Google OAuth: can't get refresh token with authorization code (and I won't be offended if it's considered a duplicate) but there are some differences: that question uses the Javascript and PHP libraries, and I'm using neither of those. That question wants to know how to get a refresh token, and I want to know if I should want a refresh token, or how the mode with no refresh tokens is intended to work.
I'm following this guide:
https://developers.google.com/identity/protocols/OAuth2WebServer
The goal is to allow users to upload files from Google Drive to my web application.
I'm not using one of Google's favored programming languages, so I don't have a library abstracting away all the interaction with Google. I need to know what the HTTP requests should actually should look like.
One of the parameters in the authorization request is access_type. The description says
Set the value to offline if your application needs to refresh access tokens when the user is not present at the browser.
I won't need to do that (I'll only want to retrieve a file on my server immediately after the user selects it) so in the spirit of not asking for more privileges than you really need, I used access_type=online. This gives me an access token and no refresh token. I've successfully used the access token to make some requests to Google Drive.
The user comes back the next day and tries to upload another file. While processing this request from the user, I make a request to Google Drive. The access token is expired, so I get a 401. What's supposed to happen next?
My guess is I should pretend this is a completely new user and send them through the full authorization process again. That would mean I have to abort whatever the user was trying to do, redirect them to https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/auth with all the parameters (scope, client_id, etc.) and embed enough information in the state parameter that I can resume the original request when the user gets back from their detour.
This seems rather difficult (in particular the part about saving and resuming the state of my application at some arbitrary point). It's a big enough obstacle that it should be explained somewhere. But the description of the access_type parameter didn't say anything about needing to insert authorization redirects everywhere. It just said the user must be "present".
You are using the right implementation. You don't need offline access if you aren't going to make requests when the user is not using the application. The thing is that access tokens expire in 1 hour. So you need to generate new access tokens if a user leaves the application and come back later.
If users have authorized your application, calling this URL with your configuration should return a new valid access token:
https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth?
scope=scopes&
include_granted_scopes=true&
state=state_parameter_passthrough_value&
redirect_uri=http://oauth2.example.com/callback&
response_type=token&
client_id=client_id
I have IdentityServer4 setup for API authentication although I have a use case where I want to verify that a guest (user) is essentially a valid user. A valid user in my case is anyone with a valid email address, so I want to do the following:
send the user an email with a verification token (preferably something which is a mash up of their email address, some salt and an expiry
the user can then enter this token into my app and they are "allowed" to go ahead
I was wondering if IdentityServer4 can/should be used to achieve the above?
Their tools show that you can generate a token although I am very new to this topic so was hoping for some guidance.
No, the tokens Identity Server deals with are access_tokens which are to do with claims-based authentication.
The tokens you need to use for email verification are commonly referred to as User Tokens, or one-time passwords (OTP). You can find a wealth of information on how to generate/consume these using those search terms but if you use the aspnet identity classes such as the UserManager you will find it has some in-built read to use. Or you can register your own UserTokenProvider with the UserManager.
In general you'd do something like this:
Use your UserTokenProvider to get a token (otp) for a specific user. The UserManager will use the security hash of that user and your own 'reason' (e.g. "EmailVerification") to generate the short OTP.
You could then wrap that OTP into an object that includes the email address, a userid maybe, and whatever you like. Safe Base64 encode it (there is a helper function within Identity Server that has this in fact, making sure it doesn't have the superfluous _ at the end which will mess with HTML links), put it in an email to the user
User clicks your link which takes them to your 'verify password' controller, with your mashed up token as payload. You decode it, work out which user it was for, get UserManager to verify the OTP part is still valid.
Job done.
If you want them to enter the OTP into your app directly, while logged in, then you could just skip the whole mash-up part of emailing a link, and email the short OTP directly.
I'm looking for a way to create a api token after registration without session
And I also have a question:
Regular site have session to identify the current user
But in api How can I identify the current user if we do not create for him a session?
I'm having trouble with these questions
The main concept is that in login request you send e-mail and password and you get the token.
In all next request you send always this token (so you know which user makes the request) and for this you also send other data (if they are necessary).
Of course you need to make sure this token is somehow unique so you can now exactly which user is making the request.
You can implement it on your own or you can take advantage on some ready components.
In fact in Laravel 5.2 you have TokenGuard built in so you can create simple token authentication out of the box. You can watch this movie on Laracasts for further details.
You can also use some other packages for example JWT Auth
I know this is not the first time the topic is treated in StackOverflow, however, I have some questions I couldn't find an answer to or other questions have opposed answers.
I am doing a rather simple REST API (Silex-PHP) to be consumed initially by just one SPA (backbone app). I don't want to comment all the several authentication methods in this question as that topic is already fully covered on SO. I'll basically create a token for each user, and this token will be attached in every request that requires authentication by the SPA. All the SPA-Server transactions will run under HTTPS. For now, my decision is that the token doesn't expire. Tokens that expire/tokens per session are not complying with the statelessness of REST, right? I understand there's a lot of room for security improvement but that's my scope for now.
I have a model for Tokens, and thus a table in the database for tokens with a FK to user_id. By this I mean the token is not part of my user model.
REGISTER
I have a POST /users (requires no authentication) that creates a user in the database and returns the new user. This complies with the one request one resource rule. However, this brings me certain doubts:
My idea is that at the time to create a new user, create a new token for the user, to immediately return it with the Response, and thus, improving the UX. The user will immediately be able to start using the web app. However, returning the token for such response would break the rule of returning just the resource. Should I instead make two requests together? One to create the user and one to retrieve the token without the user needing to reenter credentials?
If I decided to return the token together with the user, then I believe POST /users would be confusing for the API consumer, and then something like POST /auth/register appears. Once more, I dislike this idea because involves a verb. I really like the simplicity offered in this answer. But then again, I'd need to do two requests together, a POST /users and a POST /tokens. How wrong is it to do two requests together and also, how would I exactly send the relevant information for the token to be attached to a certain user if both requests are sent together?
For now my flow works like follows:
1. Register form makes a POST /users request
2. Server creates a new user and a new token, returns both in the response (break REST rule)
3. Client now attaches token to every Request that needs Authorization
The token never expires, preserving REST statelessness.
EMAIL VALIDATION
Most of the current webapps require email validation without breaking the UX for the users, i.e the users can immediately use the webapp after registering. On the other side, if I return the token with the register request as suggested above, users will immediately have access to every resource without validating emails.
Normally I'd go for the following workflow:
1. Register form sends POST /users request.
2. Server creates a new user with validated_email set to false and stores an email_validation_token. Additionally, the server sends an email generating an URL that contains the email_validation_token.
3. The user clicks on the URL that makes a request: For example POST /users/email_validation/{email_validation_token}
4. Server validates email, sets validated_email to true, generates a token and returns it in the response, redirecting the user to his home page at the same time.
This looks overcomplicated and totally ruins the UX. How'd you go about it?
LOGIN
This is quite simple, for now I am doing it this way so please correct me if wrong:
1. User fills a log in form which makes a request to POST /login sending Basic Auth credentials.
2. Server checks Basic Auth credentials and returns token for the given user.
3. Web app attached the given token to every future request.
login is a verb and thus breaks a REST rule, everyone seems to agree on doing it this way though.
LOGOUT
Why does everyone seem to need a /auth/logout endpoint? From my point of view clicking on "logout" in the web app should basically remove the token from the application and not send it in further requests. The server plays no role in this.
As it is possible that the token is kept in localStorage to prevent losing the token on a possible page refresh, logout would also imply removing the token from the localStorage. But still, this doesn't affect the server. I understand people who need to have a POST /logout are basically working with session tokens, which again break the statelessness of REST.
REMEMBER ME
I understand the remember me basically refers to saving the returned token to the localStorage or not in my case. Is this right?
If you'd recommend any further reading on this topic I'd very much appreciate it. Thanks!
REGISTER
Tokens that expire/tokens per session are not complying with the statelessness of REST, right?
No, there's nothing wrong with that. Many HTTP authentication schemes do have expiring tokens. OAuth2 is super popular for REST services, and many OAuth2 implementations force the client to refresh the access token from time to time.
My idea is that at the time to create a new user, create a new token for the user, to immediately return it with the Response, and thus, improving the UX. The user will immediately be able to start using the web app. However, returning the token for such response would break the rule of returning just the resource. Should I instead make two requests together? One to create the user and one to retrieve the token without the user needing to reenter credentials?
Typically, if you create a new resource following REST best practices, you don't return something in response to a POST like this. Doing this would make the call more RPC-like, so I would agree with you here... it's not perfectly RESTful. I'll offer two solutions to this:
Ignore this, break the best practices. Maybe it's for the best in this case, and making exceptions if they make a lot more sense is sometimes the best thing to do (after careful consideration).
If you want be more RESTful, I'll offer an alternative.
Lets assume you want to use OAuth2 (not a bad idea!). The OAuth2 API is not really RESTful for a number of reasons. I'm my mind it is still better to use a well-defined authentication API, over rolling your own for the sake of being RESTful.
That still leaves you with the problem of creating a user on your API, and in response to this (POST) call, returning a secret which can be used as an access/refresh token.
My alternative is as follows:
You don't need to have a user in order to start a session.
What you can do instead is start the session before you create the user. This guarantees that for any future call, you know you are talking to the same client.
If you start your OAuth2 process and receive your access/refresh token, you can simply do an authenticated POST request on /users. What this means is that your system needs to be aware of 2 types of authenticated users:
Users that logged in with a username/password (`grant_type = passsword1).
Users that logged in 'anonymously' and intend to create a user after the fact. (grant_type = client_credentials).
Once the user is created, you can assign your previously anonymous session with the newly created user entity, thus you don't need to do any access/refresh token exchanges after creation.
EMAIL VALIDATION
Both your suggestions to either:
Prevent the user from using the application until email validation is completed.
Allow the user to use the application immediately
Are done by applications. Which one is more appropriate really depends on your application and what's best for you. Is there any risk associated with a user starting to use an account with an email they don't own? If no, then maybe it's fine to allow the user in right away.
Here's an example where you don't want to do this: Say if the email address is used by other members of your system to add a user as a friend, the email address is a type of identity. If you don't force users to validate their emails, it means I can act on behalf of someone with a different email address. This is similar to being able to receive invitations, etc. Is this an attack vector? Then you might want to consider blocking the user from using the application until the email is validated.
You might also consider only blocking certain features in your application for which the email address might be sensitive. In the previous example, you could prevent people from seeing invitations from other users until the email is validated.
There's no right answer here, it just depends on how you intend to use the email address.
LOGIN
Please just use OAuth2. The flow you describe is already fairly close to how OAuth2 works. Take it one step further an actually use OAuth2. It's pretty great and once you get over the initial hurdle of understanding the protocol, you'll find that it's easier than you thought and fairly straightforward to just implement the bits you specifically need for your API.
Most of the PHP OAuth2 server implementations are not great. They do too much and are somewhat hard to integrate with. Rolling your own is not that hard and you're already fairly close to building something similar.
LOGOUT
The two reasons you might want a logout endpoint are:
If you use cookie/session based authentication and want to tell the server to forget the session. It sounds like this is not an issue for you.
If you want to tell the server to expire the access/refresh token earlier. Yes, you can just remove them from localstorage, and that might be good enough. Forcing to expire them server-side might give you that little extra confidence. What if someone was able to MITM your browser and now has access to your tokens? I might want to quickly logout and expire all existing tokens. It's an edge case, and I personally have never done this, but that could be a reason why you would want it.
REMEMBER ME
Yea, implementing "remember me" with local storage sounds like a good idea.
I originally took the /LOGON and /LOGOUT approach. I'm starting to explore /PRESENCE. It seems it would help me combine both knowing someone's status and authentication.
0 = Offline
1 = Available
2 = Busy
Going from Offline to anything else should include initial validation (aka require username/password). You could use PATCH or PUT for this (depending how you see it).
You are right, SESSION is not allowed in REST, hence there is no need to login or logout in REST service and /login, /logout are not nouns.
For authentication you could use
Basic authentication over SSL
Digest authentication
OAuth 2
HMAC, etc.
I prefer to use PUBLIC KEY and PRIVATE KEY [HMAC]
Private key will never be transmitted over web and I don't care about public key. The public key will be used to make the user specific actions [Who is holding the api key]
Private key will be know by client app and the server. The private key will be used to create signature. You generate a signature token using private key and add the key into the header. The server will also generate the signature and validate the request for handshake.
Authorization: Token 9944b09199c62bcf9418ad846dd0e4bbdfc6ee4b
Now how you will get private key? you have to do it manually like you put facebook, twitter or google api key on you app.
However, in some case you can also return [not recommended] the key only for once like Amazon S3 does. They provide "AWS secret access key" at the registration response.
For security reasons I hate sites that use querystring parameters.
For my registration process, I'm sending a websecurity token via email to users who register. The user checks their emails and clicks on a link emailed to them to confirm who they are.
My issue is this, I don't wish to have a page on my site that accepts a query string parameter that could automatically log someone in, giving hackers a back door into other peoples accounts.
I have put a expiry date on the tokens, but I'd like to secure it further.
Any thoughts?
This is not an issue if the token is single-use. Anybody who tries to use the token after the intended user has already consumed it will see an error. (Or you could just redirect straight to the login page.)