-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add Auth #2
Comments
Did this get brought up in today's meeting? I'm more comfortable using something like facebook login - there's a javascript sdk for it.
|
Using the facebook sdk requires creating a facebook app, getting secret keys etc (something I haven't really worked out for an open source project) |
Do we have a public Facebook account for OpenCityProject?
It is easy to create one and getting the app and the secret keys needed for the SDK to use, I have done it for some projects at work.
I think for Google, Twitter etc are similar although I haven't done it personally.
Needing to create an account and storing password probably would annoy some paranoid users, also it puts burden and responsibility on our system to protect that password (imagine some people use the same password for their bank accounts, and our app / backend failed to secure any single part of the password handling, and bear in an attacker only needs to find the weakest spot).
Given the reason above, I would suggest avoid handling the password in any part of our system if possible. And for Admin/moderators, we will need to come up with a solution of securely assign their roles (maybe the website calls a protected API not exposed to the public).
Would you all agree?
Regards,
Eddie Chiang
Sent from a mobile device. Forgive the brevity, the typos and the lack of nuance.
On 15/12/2016, at 9:23 AM, Ben Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
Using the facebook sdk requires creating a facebook app, getting secret keys etc (something I haven't really worked out for an open source project)
Password hashing is literally a one liner, and again, I've already implemented half of it, its pretty straight forward. Its probably more standard to have both?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
Yeah I also prefer not to deal with passwords and registration ourselves. Although I see your point Ben, in that it wouldn't be too hard to add. |
You guys were talking about auth, just an fyi, I think I already included a basic version in the api (api/routes/auth) with some of the endpoints already defined, its missing things like password resets and stuff but the basics are there, including a bcrypt password hasher
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: