Limit to devices being logged in from a single google account - google-chrome-extension

I need to sync chrome extension data across different devices, but to do that I need to be logged in from the same account in all the devices. So, the number of devices may be up to 20 or so. Is there any restriction on how many devices can be logged in using the same Gmail account at the same time?

Related

Security: protect from login connexion loop via multiple ip and multiple accounts

Assuming there is a mobile app that sends the mobile phone number to the backend, and the backend sends an SMS with a code to allow connection if the phone number exists. This works as intended.
But a user recently created many accounts and then made a script (?) that calls the backend route (10 times with 10 different accounts) then switches IP, calls the backend again with this new ip, etc. Every time they call the route, it generates a new SMS.
The only result is that many SMS are sent and it adds cost to the company.
Is there a way to prevent this?
Currently, a single user can not call more than 3 times the API without a successful login, but with many accounts rotation, it still generates a lot of SMS. And I guess the script can be improved.
Can we add protection API side, even if the IP changes and the headers are all correct?

SMS verification : what if user phone number changed?

I’m building an application and I’m thinking about asking user phone number to send a verification SMS. Though, imagine if the phone number is cancelled and attributed later to someone else. Then, the new person would be able to connect to my app in the name of the old one...
So is there any way to prevent this behavior ?
I want to make it like tinder : sign up possible by 2 different ways : (facebook connection and phone number) or (phone number and mail)
I have another question : I see that many sms sending services are not free (all of them actually). If I make an api with these services, anyone can send a lot of http request to it and make me pay 0,05€ times 100000000 ? And I can’t rely on IP adresses because with 3G an ip is not associated with a particular person...
To your first question:
You are describing Two Step Authentication (aka Two Step Verification) which you can read about in the Wikipedia page: Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA):
a method of confirming a user's claimed identity by utilizing something they know (password) and a second factor other than something they have or something they are. An example of a second step is the user repeating back something that was sent to them through an out-of-band mechanism.
You are correct that a phone number can change owners (as can an email address though over a longer time period on average). You are using their phone number as that out-of-band mechanism described above.
If the user has recently authenticated with their password, when you send the user an out-of-band code and they re-type that into an input box you have some degree of confidence that the end user both knows the password and has access to the SMS message and are choosing to trust that association.
You will need to consider if, and for how long, you can trust that association within the security context of the use case.
For example, adding two step verification when detecting the end-user has just authenticated on a device you have never seen before is a nice additional protection. However, using the out-of-band SMS verification in account recover could open up a big security hole. You do not want to bypass the authentication with something they know (password) in a password reset flow by simply having access to that SMS number. SMS is also not an appropriate mechanism for one-time-password (OTP).
If you want to offer you users more protections on their accounts look into implementing true MFA with software tokens (eg. Google Authenticator, Authy, etc.) and hard tokens (eg. FIDO U2F devices such as Yubikey, Google Titan, etc.).
To your second question:
You are correct, IP-based limiting is insufficient. With SMS services you are likely going to be making a server-side API call to the SMS provider. First check to see what security features your provider has out of the box. Next, protect your endpoint that is triggering the API calls to the SMS provider.
Rate limit the number of SMS messages to any one given recipient (eg. no more than X SMS messages to a single number per Y minute window)
Rate limit the number of SMS messages one person can make to different numbers (eg. no more than X different phone numbers per user per day).
Do not allow unauthenticated requests. The user should have already completed the first authentication step (something they know eg. username/password) before performing the out-of-band SMS step.
Protect the SMS form from Cross Site Forgery Requests (CSFR). Your back-end should only make the API call to the SMS provider if it knows the request came from your front-end and not another host.
Protect the SMS form from bot attacks. There are many approaches with Google ReCaptcha being one of the more common.

Notify Spotify of hackathon usage

I am hosting a hackathon at my company and intending on making use of the Spotify WebAPI. I wanted to know what the preferred way of registering apps (does every attendee need a Spotify account or is there some work I can do ahead of the hackathon to have everything ready), as well as notify Spotify of a period of time they can expect a high volume of requests originating from my company's IP.
My planned approach is to have 1 premium account with multiple apps registered (1 per team). Is there a better way to do this?

How to secure account creation via (private) API?

Some time ago, it was commonplace for smartphone apps to open a browser to a registration page with a CAPTCHA, or to require separate signup via web, because API signup was seen as vulnerable.
Now most apps seem to offer registration via native form, though endpoints for this are usually not documented in their public API. I haven't seen many reports of this being abused to create spam accounts.
How is this done? Is there a standard crypto/handshake process to verify real signups, or does signup typically rely on undocumented endpoints and simple API key passing?
Embedding yields a better experience but has the issue you mention. Yes, the service owners on the other end are still worried about this and combating the problem. And undocumented APIs don't help and the service owners know this.
One of the tools in the toolbox these days is keys assigned to devices which can be used for throttling. This would essentially let you limit the amt of service that can be consumed on a per device basis and it would require you have a device (or can steal the key from one) in order to provide service. So long as the process to issue keys to new devices is strong (a solvable problem) then you can offer a CAPTCHA-free signup experience within the confines of what you are willing to give to a device.
I'd also note that there are other well known approaches you can use, like IP throttling and handshakes with other service providers (like a phone carrier). Depending upon the problem domain these are on the table too...

Preventing fake accounts

I'm working on a simple web service that allows users to sign up for free and upload a small amount of data. I can easily establish a quota for each user, but malicious users could create fake accounts to upload as much data as they like in a denial-of-service attack.
Obviously, there's no perfect defense against this type of attack, but what can we do to mitigate this problem?
Tie it to a more-or-less unique identifier (phone number, bank account number, facebook/google/etc account) or to a finite resource (such as time, by using a captcha).
use a captcha on account creation to ensure that it's a
human and not an automated process.
require a valid email address and require that they click a link in their email to validate that that's their email address and continue the registration process. This cuts down on their ability to create many throwaway accounts because you can limit them to only having one account per email address and they have to then create a new email address for each account they want to create.
When the user signs up, the user supplies a valid email. Most accounts are not enabled until a response has been received, usually by clicking a link in the body of that email. When that click-through is received, you should be able to grab an IP address. That should help you curtail an abundance of casual DOS attacks.
Consider Phone Number Verification
Requiring phone number for account creation is the best approach I've come across; Creating a new email or cycling an IP address is pretty trivial, but genuine sms phone numbers cost money to activate & grant your service the ability to restrict access by country-code.
An important caveat: Virtual phone numbers (like google-voice), temporary-phone number services, & burner phones can make sms-verification ineffective at preventing duplicate user accounts. Depending on your use case, it might be worthwhile to use a service, like Vonage's Number Insight api, that lets you identify those types of numbers.
Authillo is a passwordless authentication provider that prevents duplicate/fake accounts by leveraging sms verification, liveness detection, & facial recognition. Depending on how critical it is that you prevent fake accounts on your service, their base plan might be what you're looking for.
Just log the IPs and assume the same user if the IP does not change within a time interval. This is bad, because it would prevent multiple users in the same house (same IP) but it is a good start.

Resources