Im planning on making an application that has two parts two it:
React native mobile app
Browser web-app for desktop users
I'm trying to plan out how im going to manage the backend authentication for this (Node.js, passport.js). Ideally, I can just have one backend manage it, regardless of which type of client.
Lets say im going to ONLY have google auth (for simplicity). I don't need to hit googles API's for any information (like profile, contacts, etc), I just want them to login with a google account. My understanding so far is that theres two main ways (especially since im using passport.js).
jwt based approach
session based approach
For either approach, my issue arises when it comes to the react native app. Since I'm not able to use the HttpOnly cookie, im not sure how to safely store data. e.g
In the jwt approach, if the server administers an access token and a refresh token, the react native client can just store them both in the same place e.g https://github.com/mcodex/react-native-sensitive-info. Which means the refresh token is just as susceptible as the access token, which defeats the point of a refresh token, so might as well just have the access token be long lived.
In the session based approach, react native can just store the session id some where (like react-native-sensitive-info above), and the same problem arises
My current thoughts on what should be done:
It seems like theres no way of getting around the security issue of storing information in react native, so as of now I feel like im just going to follow the JWT approach, and store the access + refresh token in react-native-sensitive-info. However, this does mean that the login endpoint is going to return the access + refresh token in the body of the request when the User-agent is mobile. When the user agent is web then we should be able to set an httponly cookie. The only thing that I can think of is if there is a malicious request that masks the user agent (is this possible?), and then can receive the access + refresh token in the body and will be able to do whatever with that.
Performance Aside
A session based storage approach seems much simpler overall. Yes it does store state on the backend, but if we did the JWT approach we would have to store peoples refresh tokens somewhere on the backend anyway (If theres ever a scenario where we need to invalidate peoples refresh tokens, e.g on logout or damage prevention).
This way, say we have a sessions table, when a user logs out, or if we want to invalidate sessions, all we have to do is delete rows from that table. In the JWT method, if we want to invalidate a refresh token, we have to have a blocklist table (which will only keep growing in size, since refresh tokens shouldn't expire, but I guess they can be dropped after a long period of time). However, if you have LOTS of users, the sessions table could get large, which could cause performance issues (but you could probably just drop sessions over a certain age)
/Aside
Questions:
Ive noticed mobile applications have NEVER asked me to relogin with OAuth. Does that mean they're constantly using their refresh token whenever the access token expires? If theres no clear way to store that in a secure way in mobile, do they just have super long lasting access tokens?
Is all of this thinking overkill? Is it fine to just store a super long-lasting access-token in react native and just use that all the time? Then when the user presses 'logout' we can drop that from local storage?
Would a third party auth system like auth0 manage all of this for me?
I'll try to share my experiencies in different kinds of app, this way things may get more clear.
Authentication Method
On most of the mobile applications (with web applications) I've worked with long term access tokens on the mobile side, most of applications don't require the user to login each time you open the app. Usually we store the token in a Secure Storage.
In some cases I've worked with a memory database (Redis) to put the user's session it's really fast and you don't need to query your main database each request (this was used for a high availability system, it may be overkill for most usecases)
Some very specific solutions may require more security, this will depend on your product (like banks, and transactions apps or apps the keep sensitive data) in these cases I would recommend you to login the user every time he closes the app or stays inactive for to long. (this kind of solution usually relies on fingerprint/faceId libs)
My personal opinion on this matter is to go with jwt, it's easy to maintain on the server side if you need to change backends and has a more defined pattern to follow, but that's my opinion and if you have high demand or some specific usecase this may change.
Storage
Talking about the storage options, there are some good suggestions on where to save data like tokens in a secure way on the react native docs,a good option I've used sometime would be:
https://github.com/emeraldsanto/react-native-encrypted-storage
but you can see more options and it advantages here:
https://reactnative.dev/docs/security#secure-storage
Third party libs
They usually helps with the basics if your projects has the budget and not a lot of customization on the authentication process, usually if it's a brand new project (on the back and front end) they work well.
Most of them will handle most of the hurdle for you like token renovation but you should mind the price scalability for these kind of approach
Wish success on your project.
Related
The gist of it all is that I'm trying to fetch audio metadata from a user's google drive files to store them into firebase.
At first I intended to do this locally, entirely client-sided, because my front-facing web/iOS/Android app is in flutter;
but as it turns out, there's almost no library handling audio metadata properly, and after dabbling with it, I realized I could probably get some formats (say, .wav & most RIFF-type audio files) to work, but doing an entire library to handle all kinds of audio metadata was a task significantly bigger than my original plans. Another option would be to create interfaces between C++ code and/or JS code into my Flutter application, but I'd have almost no control over that, it's not the easiest of process, and there would be possible inconsistencies between platforms.
I might make that library eventually, but in order to facilitate my work, I decided to use a server as a middleman that'd run with node and handle the file requests and metadata treatment, & also facilitate the interactions with firebase for me by making them handled by a service account.
Now, this makes me run into one issue : how to handle the google Auth.
When my user logs into my app, I get all the required auth scopes (google drive files access and write, contacts, email, etc) for my app; it goes through the consent screen and I get authenticated.
I'm still a little confused with the recommendations from google and best practices in this case, since my app, in itself, did not require an auth system outside of getting access to the google drive files through google identification, and I therefore do not have Firebase/Firestore users; I can simply store them in my (firestore) database for identification purposes (or maybe tie in the frontend flow to my firestore app to also create a user when logging in through google if that is possible. I'm currently using the google sign in
flutter package.)
To come back to my actual problem now that the situation is laid out :
Should I just transfer the auth tokens (and maybe reverify them in some ways to avoid impersonation) from my frontend app to the server through a HTTPS post request or through headers, and use them to directly query the Google Drive API (I wouldn't even need to store them outside of memory, which would be relatively safe against any attacks on the server itself), handle the files and the possibly expired token ?
Should I modify my frontend workflow so it directly grants access to my server who would handle the session rather than getting the tokens locally ?
In the first case, I would most likely simply use the users UID as identifiers for the firestore data (none of it is sensitive anyway, it would simply be playlists and some metadata). In the second case, I could probably implement a stronger security on firestore using the firestore rules,but it'd require a significant amount of refactoring and logic changes in my frontend.
In case that wasn't clear, I wish my server to make all the Drive related requests (after getting the proper authorizations from the user of course) and handle these without having to request the files locally in frontend. Both solutions (and others if available) should work, but I'm wondering what the best practice would be in the context of the Oauth2 system used by google and the fact that the authorization is transitioning between client and server and could be subject to security issues.
I'll add code/visual representations if this isn't clear enough. It is to me, but I obviously designed the mess.
I am trying to build a registration/login system using the PERN stack (Postgres, Express, React & Node) for a client website.
I was doing some researching and came across HTTP Cookie and JWT token authorizations (many more but apparently those two are the dominant).
I noticed alot apps and tutorials that uses Node JS seems to use JWT alot, and store these in localstorage. But I'm doubtful about the security because I feel like a developer can basically go into localstorage and get the JWT token which o
Is there a better way to secure user authentications with this stack or is using localstorage the rule of thumb? If so, why is that?
Thank you for your time.
One limiting medium to the security of both session IDs and JWTs is network transmission. In this case, both are only as secure as the network itself. But most likely, your application would be using something like HTTPS or SSL, in which case any data being sent across the network would be reasonably secure.
Regarding your other edge case of someone trying to sniff at a JWT in local storage, there are a few options you may consider:
First, the nature of the JWT is that it is generally tamper-proof. A JWT contains inside of it a checksum, which is a unique hash based on the actual contents of the JWT. Let's says that some malicious user sniffed local storage, and then tried to change e.g. the claims section of the JWT. In doing so, this would also change the checksum (which that user would not be able to figure out, lacking the server key). Then, the next time the compromised JWT is sent to the server, the server would reject it, because the computed checksum would not match with the value contained in the JWT.
Second, in the event the above be deemed not secure enough, it is possible to pass around encrypted JWT. If you go with this option, both the server and client would encrypt/decrypt before sending a JWT, which adds an extra layer of protection.
Security of network transmission is just one case of whole solution in web applications.
Im currently in the research of the same topic and as you said a lot of tutorials, blogs, youtube and other sources gives an excellent examples of using JWT tokens for handling user data. Unfortunately hardly anyone go deepest in handling and processing user sessions from administration point of view - where the real problems starts.
Logging the user in and sends JTW token in response to the client is not a problem at all. The problem begin when you as administrator want to invalidate a user.
Refer to this sources:
http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2016/06/13/stop-using-jwt-for-sessions/
Logout/invalidate a JWT
The session cookie with session data stored in server-side is currently the best option for web application.
I am storing Tokens on Session/Local storage on the client side.The problem I am facing is once a user copies that token and uses it for other logged-in session services it works but it should return invalid token on JWT.varify.
Is there any way to Blacklist/Delete/Expire currently used token once a user has logged out?
There a a few ways to set up a blacklist for that purpose:
1) (Blacklist users in the database) Add a database column isTokenExpired for users and set it to false on a successful login, and true when you want to expire the token (for example when the user changes their password, logs out, or enough time has expired).
The above method will achieve your purpose, but I feel it is an insult to programming. I assume you are using JWT so that the user doesn't have to log in every time, and that you have only 1 server which is doing the authentication and all other server functions. Although JWT was not designed for "sessions", using JWT for this purpose can take load off the database. But if you are then setting and checking another database flag on every user action, you are adding that load again, and you still have all the load associated with the JWT etc, so you might as well just re-auth on every user action.
2) (Blacklist a user/the token in server RAM) When I researched this problem for myself (how to invalidate individual tokens), I found some solutions where the server maintains either a whitelist or blacklist in RAM, so without adding database or file load. This may be a somewhat better solution, but I can't remember the names of any of the libraries that facilitate this. Maybe someone else can mention some of them.
3) Set token to a very short expiry time (For example 60 seconds or 5 minutes) and set up the client to automatically request a new token every (~55 seconds or ~4 minutes 50 seconds). The server would then check and validate the token in the same way I assume you are doing it now, without accessing the database, and would then generate a new token with the same values for all the other fields, but with a new "expiry time" value, and send that token back to the client where it would replace its JWT with this new JWT, and re-start its 5-minute timer. This is a good balance between the other choices, and maintains some of the benefits of using the JWT, but does add some small cost. I think this is a pretty good solution for many applications, but it definitely depends on the specific application, but it is somewhat hacky and definitely not "the right way" to do it.
4) Use JWT + Sessions This is "the right way" to do it. After all my research a long time ago, I realized that JWT's are not designed to be used for maintaining sessions: JWT is only a secure way of representing a claim. Imagine having a large system with tens of millions of users, and you require many servers around the world. You may have 3 authentication servers (in USA, Australia, UK). The user will then send its username and password to an authentication server, where the details will be checked in the database, and if valid it will be sent a JWT. You may then also have 10+ regular servers which handle your API. The client will then make each request to an API server with its JWT. The API server will have a copy of the secret key that was used by the authentication server to generate the JWT, and will validate your claim. Your claim is "I am authenticated". This API server will then generate a session and the client will be "logged in". The JWT may be set to expire after 5 minutes. If the user does not log in within this 5 minutes, they will not be able to log in. If they do, they will be logged in until the API server kicks them out. Whenever something happens that would cause you to want to kick the user, the API server can close the session. Even for a single-server application this is still the right way to do it. JWT are not for sessions, and you (exactly as I did) are starting to notice these seemingly unsolvable problems because you are using JWT for sessions.
Anyway, I recommend 3 or 4, both of these options have a net-positive value for many applications.
1 and 2 seem to make more problems than the benefits they provide.
But of course, it always depends on the application. If you're just making some website on fiverr for $5 then just do whatever, you know what I mean?
If there's a better solution I'd be interested to know too! Just remember that JWT represents a claim, and consider exactly what claim your client is representing.
Answering your first question (where is JWT stored in server Node.js)
JWT tokens are not stored on server side. It is a signature(by a secret key, RFC 7519 ) based authentication system.
So server just verifies the token and if it's verified then it gives access to the user and hence any user having your token can act as you.
For example - you can copy cookies/storage of a logged in facebook user and then go to another browser and set those cookies/storage. You will be logged in as that user for a few.
FYI #safebookverified 3rd way is mostly used. thanks.
I'm tackling the design of my first API and am struggling somewhat with authorisation concepts - I was hoping some kind people could give me some advice!
What I'm building:
An API that will eventually be accessed by third party apps and a mobile app.
A web-based 'client' (first-party single page app) that will use the API. (Should this first-party app be 'a part' of the API, or a completely separate node app?)
Technology I plan to use:
Node
Express
Passport
Mongodb with Mongoose
I'm not wed to express or passport, they just seem like the best options and are well documented - bit I wouldn't want a potential solution to be dismissed because of alternative dependencies. Same with Mongoose, I actually prefer the look of Monk (or even just Mongojs), but every tut seems to use mongoose, so seems like the safest option for a node beginner.
Authenticating a user is simple enough (I've gone through the fantastic Beer Locker tutorial), what I'm struggling with is ongoing authorisation. Naturally I don't want the user to have to input a username and password with every request they make - should this information be stored locally and sent with every request? (if so, how? I can't find any info on handling an API with a session) or should I be working with tokens of some sort? The small amount of reading I did on 'Digest' authorisation (including the Beer Locker tutorial follow-up) made it seem like it had security issues, at least with the Passport implementation (this I don't fully understand, but seems to relate to hashing passwords, which passport doesn't do as standard, and only MD5 is supported even if it's added?).
I have built a working API that I can authorise with 'Basic' (directly, through Postman), so I have the foundations in place - authorisation works, I just need the tools to take that to the next step and add sessions into the mix!
I've been trying to get my head around this for a couple of days now, but I fear I'm too stuck in a more traditional local web-app workflow - the whole API thing is throwing me somewhat.
Any help is hugely appreciated, even if it's just pointing me at an appropriate tutorial - the above set of requirements must be quite common!
I have come accross this problem too...
I can only recommend doing this for the beginning:
http://scotch.io/tutorials/javascript/easy-node-authentication-setup-and-local
tell me if it helped :)
As I understand you have done the authentication and the only thing you have to do now is store somewhere that the current user is authenticated, his name, roles etc to use later with other requests. In the Passport you will do it in the function callback (instead of the "If this function gets called..." comment).
Now you have to decide, you have two options:
Store the user information (name, roles etc.) on your server (in a session) and give the user some long code which will identify his session for the next requests
to store the information on your server you may use for example the express-session middleware
it would be probably best to save the session identifier in a cookie, but read some security issues before
Give the user something that would prove to you he/she is authenticated and which name, roles etc. he/she has
you can generate a token, that contains the user information (name, roles etc.) that the user will send with every request. to know this token is legit, you will have to sign it. more on this is on jwt.io and you can use express-jwt middleware.
you dont have to care about storage of session with this one
the token can be placed to a cookie too, but same security issues apply. it is still considered better that localstorage (more here)
I'm currently searching the best way for developing my next webapplication. I'm thinking about using Backbone.js and build a single page application. But I really can't imagine how to secure my app since nearly everything is done on client side. Of course I just could prevent the users from accessing my RESTful Api so they would not have access to my data. But all the view/model/collection/template js files are still accessible.
Or is there a known way to serve the js files with php (laravel), which would allow me to only serve the files I need for the respective user.
I just couldn't find a solution by searching the Web. But I just don't think that I am the lonely person who needs a clean and secure authentication method including different user rights.
Thank you in advance!
Your backend application will fetch data from a backend (= API), and probably send back some changes.
This code can't have "security holes / leaks" as long as your backend is secured.
If you are afraid of people stealing your code, you can always minify the JS (check grunt.js and almond.js for this)
To secure your backend you can make use of Laravel's auth class, and the auth filter as mentioned before.
Besides normal auth, you could implement roles, that you can assign to specific users, giving them more or less access to certain resources in your backend.
Here's the method I would try :
Separate the application in two parts.
One part - login via regular Laravel Auth on a separate page, and then when the user is logged in serve the single page app in a different view.
Wouldn't this work?
Web Services are no different than any other web application you build. At the end of the day you are exposing functionality to the client (which is also the attacker). It doesn't matter what the client is implemented in, if you expose dangerous functionality you will be hacked.
Have a session state, keep track of the user id and make sure that the user is only accessing resources they have been allowed to access.
I do not think that what JS/template files are exposed really matters. Essentially, you should only be allowing data interaction to authenticated users. Think of this as two separate applications.
The front-end application logs in, and a cookie is stored (or some other persistence is used).
The back-end application then uses the persistent authentication to validate every single user request for data, and every user action.
This way you don't have to worry about the security, the client can only fetch the data that the server allows it to, and, likewise, it can only interact with the data insofar as the server allows it. You shouldn't be relying on the client side for security anyway, even logged in, otherwise some malicious user could, conceivably, save all your frontend code and use it against you without authentication.