Few sites I've come across using either Google, Facebook or Twitter connect for login. Still they are asking for new password creation.
Ex: http://setapp.me/
Why user need to setup another password when the user is using OpenID/Facebook/Twitter connect?
One need I can think of: if the user disconnects the app from any of the above OAuth/OpenId connect services providers (Google/FB/Twitter/...), then as an alternative way for the user to login - as a best practice.
What they're doing is an incremental step towards federation, but not what I'd describe as a best practice. For apps that aren't ready to fully embrace relying on another service for identity it is still sometimes helpful to connect with identity providers to speed up the sign-up process. In other words, just as a mechanism for pre-populating the signup form.
However, if using it for sign-on, then having a local password is one more potential vulnerability. The reality is the vast majority of users just re-use passwords across sites. That password is only as secure as the weakest application that stores it. If one app is compromised and email & passwords recovered, attackers know that a good percentage of those are valid logins elsewhere.
Best thing to do when federating with Google/Facebook/etc is to not ask the user for their password at all. Trust the major identity providers to keep account information & credentials secure rather than take on that responsibility yourself and deal with the fallout if your app is compromised.
Lots of good reading here if you're up for it: https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/document/pub?id=1O7jyQLb7dW6EnJrFsWZDyh0Yq0aFJU5UJ4i5QzYlTjU#h.moajj1qnb85l
Related
In case of using password-backed authentication, if user forgets the password, the provider always trusts the user's email security.
So why the whole fuss? Why not use email for sending the secret login keys to registered users? Isn't that what sites do when user forgets the password?
What is the reason for still using passwords for authentication?
What are the major problems with passwordless auth that passworded auth lacks?
One difference is if you log on via forgotten password, you usually have to change the password to something else, so it cannot be undetected - an attacker will likely be discovered. If it's just a login link in email, this is not the case, the attacker can log in, and likely nobody will notice. There can be controls to mitigate this of course, but it quickly becomes a UX question.
Another UX aspect is having to go to your email all the time if there is only a login link. A lot of people use password managers, which make entering very secure and unique passwords really easy. If it's a login link, you have to open your email, disrupting your flow in the application. It's arguably inconvenient.
Also a login link sent in an email will contain a token in the url. That will be remembered by the browser, logged in intermediate proxies, logged to the web server logs and so on. Secrets should not be sent in the url. However, if it's a one-time token valid for a (very) limited time, this risk is very much mitigated.
Having said all these, there are commercial applications that opted for passwordless login via an emailed link. If implemented correctly (a strong enough one-time token with enough entropy, generated with a proper crypto random generator and so on), passwordless login via an emailed link can be secure enough for many applications, and it's mostly a UX question (keeping in mind the security considerations above).
I have two web applications. Today they both have their own way of authenticating users and storing their credentials. Some of my users use both applications -but their usernames/passwords may be different in each application.
I would like to introduce a single-sign-on solution for these application so my users only need to worry about a single username/password.
What is the best way to migrate these applications into an SSO solution? Specifically, how do I securely associate a user in Application A with their respective user in Application B?
For one user, since the usernames may be different in each application, I don't think I can run a script a 'merge them.' I would prefer the users elect to merge their accounts and prove they own both accounts. Can OpenId Connect help with this problem? After authenticating with App A, I can ask if they would like to pair App B to their credentials in App A. They would then be redirected to authenticated to App B. If successful, it would redirect back to App A with their App B username in an OpenId Connect token. The SSO solution would then store their App A and App B credentials together as a pair. In the future, local app sessions with each application can still be creating using their legacy username but the user only deals with a single SSO username going forward. Thoughts? What are other approaches to solving this problem?
I'm not concerned about the cookie/cross-domain issues. I'm most interested in how to reconcile the usernames across both systems.
I want to make a simple REST web app, where the user interact with the objects through links in an email. The links have a token that can be used to authenticate a user without a username and password, like the ones that are usually used to reset a password.
What are the best practices for such a login-less, token-based authentication system?
I am by no means a security expert.. but some of the points which come to mind are -
Lifetime - The token should expire after a set period of time. Indefinite access using the token certainly doesn't make sense.
Replay attacks - The mechanism should prevent replay attacks.. which means the token should be valid for not only a set period of time, but also fixed number of calls.. Ideally exactly 1. If this number is not exactly 1, then it opens another can of worms..
Unless, its a feature :( For example, by design, the user is expected to share link with others, and anyone with the link should be able to access the resource in question.
Authorization - Granularity of the access granted by the token. Is it black and white.. or is the token also associated with a fixed set of rights. For example - token X was issued for Read-Only access, vs token Y was issued, for same resource with R/W access.
Administration - User / Admin should be able to see and verify any currently active and issued tokens, and associated information (permissions granted / affected resource etc), and explicitly revoke them, if necessary.
Secure Communication - You should consider security of the medium through which the url with token will be sent to the user. i.e. in your scenario, do the users receive emails over secure channel (TLS / SSL)? Should the email itself be protected with DRM?
Man in the Middle / Leaks - Similarly, even though you are providing the url in email, and the user is not logging on using user name and password over SSL, the resource should still be accessed using the url with token over SSL. This will prevent any capturing of the tokens from url, by a man in the middle. You would also need to be very careful about when the users browser may use this url in places you didn't expect..
I can vaguely recall reading about a popular site being affected by their urls being used as Refer Url, when displaying ads on their website.. which means, the advertisers site would probably get the url with the token as Refer.
Generation - Choice of algorithm to generate the token - May seem pretty obvious, but the token should be extremely obscure and near impossible to guess or brute force. The tokens should never be reused and the algorithm should avoid collisions.
Server Side Security - The tokens should probably be treated with same security as you would secure users id and password. If your user database gets hacked, hackers should not get the users passwords and other sensitive information.. Similarly, if your user / resource / token database gets hacked, despite the expiration on the tokens, hackers should not be able to access the resources as users for x hours.
Point is, when the tokens are stored on server side, they should themselves be secured / encrypted.
On the same lines.. just like its bad practice to log information like passwords in log file (specially plain text), You'd also have to consider any place these urls may get logged (plain text) on your server.. For example web server logs. If only super admins should have access to user's database, then they should also be the only ones to be able to see these token.. Not your web server admin and not any hackers parsing the log file after the hack.
Auditing - If there will be a need for auditing, you'd need some mechanism in place to prove that while the user didn't log on to the system, they are indeed the ones who performed the action / operation in question. Would you want to track the ip address and other information along with the request which would help such auditing?
Consent - Do your users even consent to the use of such alternate means of authentication and authorization? Should this be an optional / opt in feature?
EDIT: I found a link to the referrer url problem I was recalling. Although it was in context of user information.
I agree to 10 points of Vikas however from security perspective I have to tell you few points that you must be careful.
I will try to keep as simple as possible. And here I simplify the technical stuff to your special case.
Firstly tokens are used to prevent Cross Site Request Forgery attacks (XSRF). Keep that in your mind. If there is a web platfrom without unique tokens on the forms then any attacker can force the user to make malicious requests.
If you simply try to authenticate the user with a token, this is pretty wrong. Because there must be no simple authentication process and you can not rely on token.
Here is how the login system works in official security documentations, im writing as I remember:
Identification: you have to identify the user firstly, that is generally done with username. YOu will know that there is a user exist in your system.
Authentication: Let's say you have already identified that user A want to login. So you mast authenticate the user A with something that you know and user A know. We call it password simply :) You cannot by pass this step with plain text methods. Passwords are generally encrypted in your db and also through all communication with secure certicates, check ssl.
Authorization: okay you made the authentication somehow, the user has a right to get Authorization. Let's say if the admin type user is logged in, he has differen rigts and if the normal user is logged in then she has regular rights.
Session control: finally you have to control the session with a secure way. Here generally in web applciations people use access tokens for all requests to be sure that the authorized user is aware of the request. As a platform owner you are responsible to secure everything until the session ends. If you don't satisfy the users with your security, then probably your platf is not going to survive longer.
Tokens have different lifetime to expire and different access rights.
Now let's look at what facebok like companies do with mobile aplications. For the mobile app they generate a unique access token which is alway alive. One shortcoming here is, if any attacker steal the mobile token generally she can do anything in the account anytime :) Anyway here our point is how they verify the users with those tokens; firstly the token is unique for that device. (Actually not exactly unique or not dependent on hardware, because if you clearly steal the necessary files from the device then you can use it on another phone). So with this unique access token which is generated with users password at their initial login on mobile app, they can login always automatically with that. And this method is a little similar to what you want to do. However pay attention that they don't authenticate the users with links or email code.
Verification is not an authentication, don't forget that. By sending e-mail you can verify the users if the emailed code is unique and valid for only 30 sec or 1 minute. I hope you got the point.
Here I suggest you to check single sign on across multiple domains, which is really interesting.
Single Sign On across multiple domains
Let's say you are logged in to google.com and then you visit the youtube.com Opps the youtube is already logged in? Yea, cool right, but exist for long time. They can authenticate users accross domains which use different cookies with a little and secure trick. You will read on the link.
If your service is not really confidential and if you want to make your users happy with easy login system. Here is two of my solutions which I love :)
1-) Ask users their email address: just directly send 4-6 digit code as e-mail. Ask user the enter/click on that. There will be no password at all, only unique code on each login.
2-) Let's say you need to verify the user with a stronger way than email. Then mobile phone :) Here trick is; you will not send the verification code to user, but they will send what you tell them to you.
Ask to user to send a SMS with a unique CODE to XXXXXX your number :) Connect your mobile operator with your web service and check whether the code is sent to you by the user :)
There is always a trade-off between security and simplicity, and also with complexity. You have to find the balance.
Don't try to make it simple if your security is going away.
Don't try to make it complex if it'll seem more secure.
Hope those informationn help you.
The apps that I build frequently have 'social media service' requirements; e.g.
Twitter
bit.ly
Facebook
For most of these services, I need to have an API key of some sort. I'm trying to work out the best way of including these API keys in the application binary. The desired level of security depends on the possible attacks that can be conducted by malicious attackers.
Twitter
I have an xAuth-enabled key and secret. Both need to be used by the iPhone app.
Fallout from attack
Malicious users could post twitter status updates masquerading as coming from my app. There is no twitter account to hijack and start posting status updates on.
bit.ly
I have a username, password and API key.
To login to the website and access analytics, the username and password are required.
To create links via the API, only the username and API key are required by my iPhone apps. The password will not be in the app in any form.
Fallout from attack
Malicious users could create links on my bit.ly account. They would need to do a separate attack to brute-force or otherwise gain the password to login to the account.
For both of those services, the potential for harm doesn't seem too great. But for other services, it could be much worse.
I can just define the API credentials as strings in the header or in-line in the code, but then it's vulnerable to someone using strings on the application to see what's in it.
I could then start doing silly concatenation / xor-ing in the code to recreate the API key in memory, and the attacker would have to do a bit more work to recover any keys in the binary. My concern with that is that I'm not a cryptographer and would create an embarrassingly weak form of obfuscation there.
What better suggestions do people have?
The attacker can just sniff your traffic and extract the secret from there. So any obfuscation is easily circumvented.
Even SSL won't help much, since you can intercept the networking API which receives the unencrypted data.
The secure way to solve this is create your own server, keep the secret stuff server side, and use your own server from your app, and the server then relays to the other webservice. This way the attacker never has access to the secret.
A good suggestion is not to worry about it. There are plenty of apps that store their API keys in plain text. The point is you need a lot of different bits of information to construct an access token.
As long as you're not storing username+password combos in plain text on the file system or transmitting them over the network without SSL/HTTPS etc then you're fine.
There are several applications that use your domain credentials for login. Eg: Custom Corporate apps. How do you ensure that such applications don't store your password?
The reason I am asking this is: If you are designing an app which does the same thing, how do you convince the user that your app can be trusted not to store the password?
If you really want the user to be sure your app is not keeping their password, don't use their password.
Microsoft Active Directory Domain Logon uses Kerberos. Kerberos is an SSO solution; an application may make use of a user's Kerberos credentials without requiring that the user enter their password a second time. The credentials obtained by the application may only be valid for as long as the user's Kerberos ticket - probably at most a week.
If you have a web application, it too may take part in the warm goodness via SPNEGO. You may have seen this in the form of Sharepoint sites that don't require a login if you are on the company domain.
If you have used standard AD-based Windows authentication they shouldn't have your password but they could certainly perform actions using your user context.
If you provide a username/password to login using standard Windows authentication then there is no way for you to be sure they haven't saved that.
If Windows auth issued login tokens that expired this might be a different story, but I do not believe that is how it works and certainly would still be useless with the second case.