I work for an ecommerce site and we are looking to expose much of our core functionality via a set of APIs. We plan on re-writing some of our own public facing applications (e.g. the main shop website and our mobile app) to call these new APIs also. We also want to offer some of these APIs out to third-parties who want to integrate with us.
My first question is - what is a suitable authentication method for these APIs? Everything I read is about OAuth, but am I right in saying that this doesn't fit in this case as we're not looking to use another log in system (e.g. Facebook, Google) but rather restrict access to our own API (so maybe an API key or JWT solution would be better?)
Secondly, our current website has it's own user accounts system. How do you offer /user endpoints (like GET user/1235/paymentmethods) in an API like this? Surely the actual user (website customer) needs to authenticate somehow in order for the given API consumer to access their data.
I've spent the last 2 days reading about this but I'm at a loss as to how to go about this! Any help much appreciated.
Related
So, I have a RESTful API (built with Hapi.js) that has endpoints consumed by users and my front-end app (built with Next.js). GET api/candies is one of them, I'll take it as an example.
The front-end asks the list of candies stored in my DB and displays them on a page anyone can access (it has to be this way). The front-end doesn't provide an API token since people could read/use it. But, users who want to get this list of candies (to build whatever they want with it) must provide a valid API token (which they get by creating an account on my front-end app).
How could my API tell if a request for api/candies is from a user or from my front-end app, so it can verify (or not) the validity of their token?
I'm wondering if my problem isn't also about web scraping.
Can anyone help me please? :D
I thought about the same problem a while ago. If your frontend has a client side REST client (JS+XHR/fetch), then I don't think it is possible to do this reliably, because no matter how you identify your frontend REST client, your users will be able to copy it just by checking the HTTP requests in browser via CTRL+SHIFT+I. There are even automation tools, which use the browser e.g. Selenium. If you have a server side REST client (e.g. PHP+CURL), then just create a consumer id for the frontend and use a token. Even in this case I can easily write a few lines of code that uses the frontend for the same request. So if you want to sell the same service for money that you provide for free on your frontend, then you are out of luck here. This does not mean that there won't be consumers who are willing to pay for it.
I think your problem is bad business model.
Your requirement can be addressed by inspecting different headers sent by different user agents. You can also add custom headers from your front-end and validate the same on the backend.
Here is my scenario. Imagine there is a Yoga studio that uses a professional booking and reservation system that exposes an API. Through this API an application can make a reservation for a client. The API takes the client's userid and password to make the reservation. The booking API doesn't use OAuth or any social media sign-ins.
My desire is to create an Assistant Action that would retrieve the list of classes and allow the client to make a booking.
My puzzle is what design/architecture to look towards to supply the userid/password pair required by the booking API.
How have others solved this puzzle?
Should I store the userid/password as "user state" associated with the action?
First, you should have a conversation with the API provider about why they don't provide an OAuth-based solution. This is a security vulnerability waiting to happen, if it hasn't already.
Second, you need to think very carefully about your own risk profile in this case:
Google does not allow you to collect credential information (ie - passwords) through your Action.
Because of this, you must use Account Linking to authenticate them.
This means that you will need something (ie - a database or data store) to manage their account on your side.
This database would be a good place to keep the username/password you need to use for them for the API...
...but it now means that you need to take extreme care about protecting this database.
You don't really say how this API allows for accounts to be created and managed. If these accounts are just used for you (ie - the user doesn't necessarily see them), then you can mitigate some of that risk by treating the username/password as an opaque token that you manage and generate and that the user never sees.
If this is something that the user is aware of, then you'll need to approach the account linking in one of two ways:
Have them log into your service via an app or webapp using this credential info that you will need to save (ack!) and then link to the Assistant using OAuth.
Have them log into your service via an app or webapp using Google Sign-In, which will carry over to your Action. Then have them provide the credential info for the API, which you will need to save (ack!).
I'm new to OAuth and I would really appreciate if someone could give me a hand with my problem. I need to create a simple web application for track expenses, with some basic actions (user must be able to create an account and log in, list expenses, edit them, etc) with a REST API for each one, and the trick is that I need to be able to pass credentials to both the webpage and the API. So, after some research I've found some examples using Digest Authentication and HMAC Authentication but lot of posts also mentioned OAuth as an alternative approach, so my question is, given this scenario, would be proper to use OAuth? I mean, as far as I understand OAuth is suitable when you want to share resources with other application, which I'm not doing for this project; besides that, when you try to access the shared resource it appears a page requesting permission for the foreign application, would that page appear at some point in my application? (maybe after the login?)
Thanks in advance guys
In your current scenario it does not make sense to use OAuth. It's not what OAuth is designed for.
If your application ecosystem is going to have multiple webapps running on a single SSO (like google) then it is very helpful to have OAuth.
Suggestion: Decide based on your business/operation plan and implement accordingly.
Note: If you plan to have 10 apps in the span of the next 5 years but only have one app now it does not make sense to spend time to implement complex protocols like OAuth right now. Scale as you grow.
We intend to develop rest based api. I explored the topic but it seems, you can secure api when your client is an app (So there are many ways, public key - private key etc). What about websites / mobile website, if we are accessing rest based api in website which do not use any login for accessing contents ( login would be optional ) then how could we restrict other people from accessing rest based api ?
Does it make sense using Oauth2.0 ? I don't have clear idea of that.
More clear question could be ,How can we secure get or post request exposed over web for the website which doesn't use any login ?
If it's simple get request or post request , which will return you json data on specific input, now i have mobile website , who will access those data using get request or post request to fetch data. Well, some else can also access it , problem is i am not using Login, user can access data directly. But how can we restrict other people from accessing that data.
What do you think is the difference between securing a website that is not using REST vs one that is using REST API?
OAuth provides authorisation capabilities for your site, in a REST architecture this means a user of the mobile application will have to provide their credentials before being allowed to access the resource. The application can then decide on if that user has access to the requested resource. However you've said your website doesn't need use authorisation.
You can use certificates however good luck managing the certificate for each client. My take on it is for your explanation you don't need to secure your website because you will never be able to manage a trust relationship between the client and the server. There are some options though:
You build your own client application that you ship out to people which can verify itself with the server using a packaged certificate with the client. E.g. iOS has this kind of feature if you build for that device.
You provide a capability to download a certificate that is 'installed' in the browser and used when communicating to your REST API
Use something like a handshaking protocol so when a client wants to make the first request it says; 'hi I'm a client can we chat?' And the server responds with 'yes for the next X minutes we can however make sure you send me this key everytime you tell me something YYYYYY' (you can use something like SecureUDID or equivalent for other devices than iOS).
There are probably others but you get the basic idea. Again in my opinion if your resource doesn't need authorisation then you don't need to secure that REST API. Can I ask what kind of data are you exposing via this REST API or functionality your providing? That might help provide a better answer.
You want authorization: only some agents (mobile clients) and/or users should be allowed to access those APIs.
To solve that problem, you need identification: a way for the server to tell who is who (or what), so the right decision can be made.
There are many different way to provide some form of identification, depending how much you care about security.
The simplest is a user agent string, specific to your mobile clients. But it can be faked easily. Slightly harder to fake are client based 'secrets' - embed some kind of secret or key in your mobile client code. You can make it really complicated and secret, but as ramsinb pointed out, you can't get security this way as it would require you to be able to guarantee that the secret you're shipping with the client (wether it's code, algorithm or any other fancy construct) can't be compromised or reverse engineered. Not happening when you don't control the client.
From there, 3 choices:
Security isn't really required, don't bother
Security isn't really required, but you still want to limit access to your API to either legit users/agents or people ready to invest some time hacking your protection - go with a specific user agent or a client embedded secret - don't invest much into it as it won't block people who really want access to get it anyway
Security IS required - and then I don't think there is a way around authentication, wether it's login/password, user specific (device specific?) keys, OpenID, etc... No matter what, you'll have to add to the user burden to some extent, although you can limit that burden by allowing authentication to persist (cookies, storage....)
i'm in the early stages of developing an API for my site so that third party developers can build an iPhone application for it. The API would have a limited subset of the functionality of the full site. The trouble i have is around security and authentication for the user who downloads the application. I have come up with the following options:
The user enters the same credentials they use on the site to authenticate themselves. My API would then take the credentials when accessing information specific to the user. This is my least preferred solution as the third party application could log these details and use them maliciously on the full site.
Each user generates a unique key on the site which they can then use on the app to login. My API would take the api key as an argument when accessing information specific to the user. The main problem though is that any application can do what they like to the user once they gain access to their key even if the user has not given the application permission to do so.
To overcome the above problem the third party developer would have to register their application with the site and then the user would need to generate a unique key per application they wish to use. This would then be used to login. This is my preferred solution as each key is unique per application and user i can tell which application called the api and whether the user approved it.
My final option is to implement oAuth. We are currently waiting for the 2.0 version to be finalized and do not have the time to keep updating our code as the spec may change.
This is the first API i have had to build and i was wondering if i have understood this correctly? I'm assuming in option 1 the application could log the user credentials and use them maliciously but how does twitter overcome this issue with their third party applications? Or is it simply up to the user to trust the application they are using? If this is the case then would option 2 and/or 3 be feasible in the meantime until i switch to option 4.
I'd appreciate your feedback. Thanks
OAuth 1 and OAuth 2 are both viable options. But you will come a long way with basic authentication aswell (as long as it is over SSL). Don't be scared :)
I've implemented an API provider over OAuth 1.0. And since there are so many ready made libraries for OAuth1.0 for many platforms I would not be scared of using that either, much of the work has been done already, both for you as a provider and for third party implementors.
Anyway: you can always couple basic authentication with some very simple signing of the request using an application key and secret, say for example that as a third party developer you have to call.
https://yourapi.com/?user=11111&password=232123&random_string=23123&api_key=THIRD_PARTY_KEY×tamp=1212121212signature=efefefefefef
where the API implementor has to sign perhaps the random_string, timestamp and api_key with the secret. Then you would at least have a way of shutting down malicious apps.