I am experimenting with Supabase as a replacement for Firebase.
When it comes to the Authentication functions, I am trying to replicate what is offered in Firebase.
With Firebase, if you create a new email/password user, then Firebase will send out a 'verify user' email to that user, and within the email there is a link back to the Firebase service that when clicked will action the verify user use case.
I can't find the equivalent verify user feature in Supabase. The Supabase admin console has a facility to define a URL, but I can't find anyway for Supabase to handle this use case. I'm inferring that with Supabase I will need to create a URL somewhere that when called will action the 'verify user' use case. That seems like a serious gap to me.
Any suggestions?
In Supabase, on the Authentication settings for your project under Email Templates you can customize the template and under URL Configuration you can set the redirect pages for the account confirmations. Note that the url for the confirmation of the user (at least for the free tier I've used, here's an example from the docs: https://project-ref.supabase.co/auth/v1/verify?token={{ .TokenHash }}&type=signup&redirect_to=https://example.com/path) is a Supabase URL, once clicked the user will be redirected to the custom set URL.
Check the official documentation for the Email Templates for more info.
Related
I'm creating an OIDC provider with oidc-provider. For now, my Registration flow required email verification step, which is handler outside oidc-provider. This approach works but it leads to an issue that user can not automatically login after setting up their password.
I thinking of creating a new prompt policy name email-verification, something like:
https://<auth-endpoint>?client_id=...&prompt=email-verification
I wonder:
Is this flow acceptable with OpenID Connect specs?
Is there any document, tutorial or example in terms of specs or implementations of this approach?
The case user register in mobile app, but open email link in web (we have a mobile app with different client_id and of course, different redirect_uri. What should we redirect user to the app without error.
Thanks,
I would like to setup Google federation using Keycloak however only for authorized users in my company.
Setting up Google federation allows any Google account to login.
I have looked at the authentication flow on Keycloak but I have been unable to find a way to set it up. I can think of a few simple scenarios that I had hoped Keycloak allowed out of the box
Instead of automatically creating an account when somebody tries to login, require that an account with the exact same email/username already exists and just link them based on the email when that specific user tries to login.
Automatically create an account the first time the user logs in using Google, link them however require an admin to manually activate the account before it can be used
A combination of the first 2. Enable registration, allow the user to register an account and require an admin to activate the account, at which point the user can link them.
Try as I might, I seem to be unable to configure this. There seems to be no way to have Keycloak create an account that requires activation and if I try to create a flow where the "unique account creation" authenticator is not include, it immediately throws the user to an "invalid username/password" screen.
Did I miss something? Is there no other option than manually creating an account and linking it for every single user (or write my own authenticator which I am trying to avoid)?
If you are OK with folks from a single domain (e.g. #yourco.com), you can use the Hosted Domain parameter on the settings page. For google specifically, at least as of keycloak 11.x, both google and keycloak will ensure the user's email address matches the entered domain. I do not know if it's possible to enter multiple domains.
What we do is use the hosted domain option, and grant these new users a simple role that allows them to log into the admin panel and have read permissions on a few simple areas. This makes it easy to setup new accounts in Keycloak, we just tell users to go log in and they are setup with basic access. If someone warrants more advanced access to read private data or even write some data, they have to contact our ops team who may choose to grant them some more roles in keycloak
You could implement a custom form action. It's easier than you would expect.
If you don't want to write code you could maybe use the 'script' form action which is already available. You can get to it this way:
Authentication -> Select 'First broker login' in the dropdown -> Make a copy of it (Making a copy of it allows you to edit it). Now click 'Add execution' and chose 'Script'. Move it upwards to the top, so it's the first form action in your flow. Put the radio button on 'REQUIRED' and go to actions -> config. Now in the script you could check the username or email to match a pattern (maybe the domain name of your company), if the pattern match fails, you can call the context.failure(..) method, which is already available in the default script.
Make sure that you select this (new) first broker login in your identity provider configuration.
I'm using Keycloak for Identity Brokering through Google, Microsoft, etc. But Keycloak only allows one email per user. So the user can be authenticated only through one of the social login options (Google if gmail is added as user's email address, etc.). Is there any way to include more than one email per user, or any other workaround?
EDIT: (Editing based on comments to make scenario more clear)
In my scenario, I'm using a federated user store which contains a large number of users and and I need Keycloak to access all the emails linked to a user when that user is logging in using Google,Azure,etc. because Keycloak is using the email as the unique identifier for the authentication response from the social login provider. Without having the required email as the main email, Keycloak won't allow that user to log in through social IdP
Although, Keycloak emphasises on keeping a unique email,but there are certain scenarios where you may want to keep , say, secondary email.
This can be achieved in a couple of steps:
1. Add a custom attribute for secondary email in user like this:
2. Next , in your client create attribute mapper like this:
When I generated the token after above configuration, the new attribute was avialble in token. You can use this attribute in your app as you desire.
Parsed JWT:
I figured out the best way to deal with this is through the custom user provider (federated user store). Even though we can't add multiple emails per user through the Keycloak admin console, we can write the user provider in such a way that it can get all the emails linked to a user from our database and assign them to the email attribute of each user. Once this is done, all the emails will appear on the admin console as well.
For the social login to recognize those emails, we have to get all the emails linked to a user in the provider to an array and iterate through it until the authentication is complete. This would help to create the social login link to the user through First Login Broker authentication flow.
This is a crude way to approach this, but nevertheless it works!
I want to secure my user registration page with keycloak but couldn't think of any approaches while reading the docs.
Use case:
The registration page for new users shouldn't be public. New user get an invitation email from the admin. The email contains a link to the registration page.
I thought about using an initial access token (like for client registration) and add it to the link to the registration page. Afaik there is nothing like that for user registration?
Are there any other ways to do it?
I think you've got two options to implement it:
First
You know the e-mail of the destination user before sending the invitation, so you would let the admin create a user in keycloak with the e-mail itself as the username. Then the admin should check 'Verify e-mail', 'Update profile' and 'Update password' as required actions, so keycloak will send an activation mail (you can customize the e-mail template) and user will be required to fill his data and set a password.
If you don't want the admin to access keycloak directly, you could do it via the user management API.
Second
Implement this logic in your application. Write a user data form which is publicly accessible using a code (it might be some UUID). When admin sending the invitation mail, link a random code to the address, so when user enters the page, you can verify it. Then you'll need to save the data in keycloak as a new user, using the user management API.
Am a bit confused about the One tap sign in that was announced by google earlier this year. Our application already users Credential Management API in Chrome, which essentially provides the user with login options based on the credentials that user has saved for our site on previous visit (passwords that are saved in chrome). When I read the documentation for One tap sign in, it promises to do the same thing, but using Google's client api id. Our application has its own ID provider with our own database of user name and passwords, from the documentation it looks like One Tap sign in does not support custom ID providers. Can anyone shed more light on this, why would I use one against the other?
Thanks
Karthik
I see two major differences:
One Tap is passwordless - it uses a token based login that never exposes the user's password. Chrome Credential Management API stores and retrieves actual passwords in Chrome's password store.
One Tap is purely web based - Chrome Credential Management API relies on Chrome's specific implementation. One Tap is a purely web based workflow so it will work across browsers.
One Tap is a much better long term login solution in my opinion. The Credential Management API is experimental and currently only supported in Chrome.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Credential_Management_API#Browser_compatibility
I lead product development at Google for the one-tap/auto sign-in library, we designed it such that the library includes the Credential Management API and extends to provide assistance in account creation, secure passwordless, and cross-browsers support.
In particular, if you make a request for existing credentials with code like this:
googleyolo.retrieve({
supportedAuthMethods: [
"https://accounts.google.com",
"googleyolo://id-and-password"
],
supportedIdTokenProviders: [
{ uri: "https://accounts.google.com", clientId: "CLIENT_ID" }
]
});
then any saved username/passwords from the Credential Management API will be returned (in browsers supporting the API) along with token data for Google Accounts. The one-tap/auto sign-in JavaScript library wraps the Credential Management API for credential retrieval.
Furthermore, the library provides a googleyolo.hint method to show an email selector for one-tap selection of a verified email address to assist in new account creation, or to link to an existing account, and then be auto signed-in next time with token instead of password, across all browsers, so long as the same Google Account is active.
I'd suggest using the one-tap/auto sign-in library and consuming tokens as well as passwords in order to get assisted sign-up, keep existing users signed-in automatically, and provide functionality even if the browser does not support the Credential Management API.
As for the question about using your own database of username / password, the hope with this library is you could implement the ability to create accounts and auto sign-in to these and existing accounts with an OpenID Connect ID tokens representing the user's identity. With the one-tap / auto sign-in UX, these are not only much more usable, but far more secure then passwords and mitigate creation of weak/re-used passwords. Please consider this or, even better, a hosted auth solution like Firebase Auth or Auth0 and include the one-tap UX in the frontend UI.