How I can generate different app keys (passwords) to be used by different applications. I need to use gmail account for sending emails. but I dont want to put my password in file, I will use it in multiple projects to send email.
I dont want to put password in every project file, doing this when I change password I will have to change in all applications.
I'm looking for a way where I can use different keys for every applications. Please guide..
An App password is a 16-digit passcode that gives an app or device permission to access your Google Account.
Visit your App passwords page. You may be asked to sign in to your Google Account.
At the bottom, click Select app and choose the app you’re using.
Click Select device and choose the device you’re using.
Select Generate.
Follow the instructions to enter the App password (the 16 character code in the yellow bar) on your device.
Select Done.
Once you are finished, you won’t see that App password code again. However, you will see a list of apps and devices you’ve created App passwords for.
Note: You may not be able to create an App password for less secure apps. Learn more about allowing less secure apps.
Documentation can be found here Sign in using App password
Related
I have a running website, where users already have accounts. And I am trying to create a Google Assistant agent, accessible on Android, to help users access their information.
My issue is that I can't detect returning users on Android Smartphones, each time they have to sign in.
I tried Anonymous User Identity, but it is soon to be deprecated.
Is there an other way to keep track of users?Using some kind of userId that I can store, so I can make "my own Acount Linking" linking the person/Smartphone with already existing user accounts.
There are a few angles to your question.
Is there any way to keep track of users?
Yes... but...
You can store a userId that you generate in the user storage area. You do need to treat this like you would a cookie, so some jurisdictions might impose restrictions on this, but this is one approach to moving from the anonymous ID that is being turned off soon.
But...
How do I let them log into my service through the Action?
That is the problem. The General Policies states the following limitation for collecting user data:
Authentication Data
(including passwords, PINs, and answers to security questions)
Don't collect authentication data via the conversational interface (text or speech).
After a user's account has been linked, PINs or passwords may be used as part of a second verification process.
So you need to use Account Linking to connect to the existing account on your service.
How can I do Account Linking if I don't require Google Sign-In?
You can still use Google Sign-In for Assistant if it will (or may) provide the information as part of the profile that match what you have. So it doesn't need to use the same account - just have the same email (for example).
But that still may not be enough.
For other cases, you can look into setting things up to work with an OAuth server that you control.
So why use Google Sign-In if I setup an OAuth server that uses Google Sign-In?
Google Sign-In is good for a more streamlined flow, if you can use it. It can be done completely with voice, such as with a smart speaker, instead of requiring the user to go to a phone to complete the login. So if you have the user's email address in your account system, and you also get this from Google Sign In, then you can connect the two accounts.
In some cases, such as if the user is expected to have logged into the account on your website first, they won't even need to do that. If both the voice client and web client use the same Google project, then authentication will take place automatically.
I'm working with actions on google and dialogflow, and recently they proposed google signin to make account linking fast without writing own oauth server.
Today I implemented their google signin in my dialogflow app it is working quite fine but unfortunately I am unable to delete that account to check all development aspects, I tried my other google accounts and my friends account but soon ended up out of accounts
Un other methods when i enable and disable testing it forget about linking but in google signin it is tightly stick with the account, and i have tried almost everything i can try like restarting my phone and clearing cache of chrome browser but it looks like it is saving account somewhere in cloud.
What i need to do is, when i sign in first time it ask for name permission, i need that screen again and again for testing something
Google calls this Removing a Website or App that has access to your account. It is done using the myaccount.google.com console.
If you want to do this using Android, the easiest way is to:
Open your device's Settings app Settings app and then Google and then Google Account.
At the top, tap Security.
Under "Signing in to other sites," tap Signing in with Google.
Tap the name of your project.
Choose Remove access.
Through the web, you can go to Apps With Access to your Accounts:
Scroll down to the "Signing in with Google" section
Locate your project.
Select it, and choose "Remove access"
The name that is shown should be the name you've given to your project as part of the OAuth screen. If you haven't set that up (and if you're just playing around, you probably haven't), it will use the Project ID for your project. You can find this on the Cloud Console home screen attached to the same project name that you used in Dialogflow and the Action Console.
While you're in there, you will probably want to configure the OAuth screen to have a name for the app as it will be visible to users on the OAuth screen. From the menu, select "APIs & Services" and then "Credentials"
Select the "OAuth consent screen" tab, and fill in the "Application name".
This name should then be in the list of applications you have installed, and can remove.
I've downloaded the starter pack and performed all steps as mentioned in the tutorial. I can create accounts but if I log out and want to sign in again I always get the error invalid username or password. Can anyone share any pointers as debugging this is nearly impossible.
I've created several accounts already just to be sure the password was ok.
I've created the keycontainers
I've created the two applications that are needed in the custom policies (web app and native)
I've updated the extension file with the correct id's
yeah if you dont get your client IDS correct you cant log in and then it constantly reports as invalid credentials.
Double check that you are writing the object ids correctly.
I'm building a Windows 8.1 store app and need to incorporate authentication. This is an enterprise app used in house. We load the app onto a tablet and a team may check that tablet out for weeks at a time, go out to the field to collect data and then we put in on a shelf until another team needs to use it. Now different teams may work for difference clients so when we authenticate users not only do they get access to the app but we also check what groups they are in to determine what clients they can work on or what previous records they can search for.
I've followed various ADAL tutorials and am able to setup everything in Azure and in my app I am able to authenticate a user successfully and get their groups. This relies on ADAL handling the username/password. What happens when the app shuts down and the user in a place where there is no internet (or even a reliable cell connection)? Specifically how can I have the user type a username/password to re-authenticate and get the same groups they were in when they can't access Azure services?
It appears they isn't available as the guidance always points to that is a risky proposition to have the app handle username/passwords. I understand that stance and can appreciate the caution behind it. However, in all of the ADAL documentation that I find that says this, none of them tell me how to handle an offline authentication scenario.
I have found links such as ADAL v3: How to authenticate using UserPasswordCredential? that tell me how to bypass the ADAL login page. I may have to move to that route and handle all of the username/passwords securely within the app, but first I would like to reach out and see how others tackle this scenario. Is it really as simple as avoiding best practices and just handle the username/password within the app?
If anyone has some guidance, ADAL (or other oauth providers) documentation, or other articles/advice I can follow up on to help achieve offline authentication I would greatly appreciate it!
Additional Information:
My scenario that I'm trying to cover is what happens when I have 1 device, 1 app, and many different users? These users will be in different groups that will determine how data fields get populated (filter data in combo boxes) and what previously submitted forms they can query for. All users would need to login when online to cache their information (say on Day 0) before they can ever use the app. On Day 1 user 1 uses the app and doesn't log out. I would expect the app to have a timeout timer to log that user out after 2 hours of no activity. On Day 2, user 2 just grabs the device off the shelf and takes it out into the field. He has no internet and needs to log in to determine who they are and what group they are in. I would expect since he has logged in once and verified his credentials already that we can enable this sort of scenario.
What I'm looking for is guidance if ADAL as a library can handle this or is it truly up to me the app developer to handle this sort of scenario. As I see it currently I need to store all user credentials, but at the same time it seems like everyone advises against that. I feel like I'm in a situation where I need to create a custom login screen and store the user data, SECURELY of course, even though its not recommended. It seems like all articles on how to use ADAL are written from a consumer app standpoint (or a BYOD) and don't take into account how a mobile app would be written for the enterprise.
That depends on your app design, if the first time(app online) , user login and app store all groups ,user information .After that user doesn't need to use token to get related information again(send request to server to acquire groups/user info). If app is offline , user doesn't need to re-authenticate(app controls the user session) , just get group/user information from cache . When using resource owner flow , you still need to send authenticate request to Azure AD server which need internet.
When supporting a new web app in an enterprise environment, it is often necessary to log in as a specific user in order to diagnose a real or perceived problem they are having. Two opposing issues apply here:
Best practice is to use hashed or encrypted passwords, not clear text. Sometimes, there is a third-party SSO (single sign-on) in the middle. There is no way to retrieve the user's password. Unless the user provides it (not encouraged), there is no way to log in as that user.
Many web app's have personalization and complex authorization. Different users have different roles (admin, manager, user) with different permissions. Sometimes users can only see their data -- their customers or tasks. Some users have read-only access, while others can edit. So, each user's view of the web app is unique.
Assume that in an enterprise environment, it isn't feasible to go to the user's desk, or to connect directly to their machine.
How do you handle this situation?
Edit: I want to reiterate that in a large financial institution or typical Fortune 500 company with hundreds of thousands of employees all of the country, and around the world, it is not possible for a mere developer in some IT unit to be able to directly access a user's machine. Some of those are public-facing web apps used by customers (such as online banking and stock trading). And, many of those are intranet applications rely on Active Directory or an SSO, meaning that user credentials are the same for many applications. I do thank you all for your suggestions; some may be highly useful in other kinds of environments.
A number of these ideas inconvenience the user, either by forcing them to change their password, or by occupying their desktop for your debugging session.
Markc's idea is the best: augment your authentication logic to allow superusers to log in as a particular user by supplying not the user's credentials, but the user's name plus their superuser credentials.
I've done it like this in the past (pseudo-ish python):
if is_user_authenticated(username, userpassword):
login the user
else if ':' in userpassword:
supername, superpassword = userpassword.split(':')
if is_superuser_authenticated(supername, superpassword):
login the user
In other words, if the username and password don't authenticate, if the password has a colon, then it's actually the admin username and admin password joined by a colon, so login as the username if they are the right admin username and password.
This means you can login as the user without knowing their secrets, and without inconveniencing them.
For our web applications we use a process that for lack of a better term is defined as 'hijacking' a user's account.
Basically, administrators can 'hijack' a user's account with a simple button click. In the code, you simply use a unique identifier (user id works in a less secure environment) that then establishes the necessary credentials in the session so that they can then work within that user's profile. For a more secure environment you could use a unique hash for each user.
In order to ensure that this hijack method is secure, it always first verifies that the request is being made by an authenticated administrator with the appropriate rights. Because of this it becomes necessary for either the administrator's session to be hijacked or for their authentication credentials to be captured in order for someone to ever exploit the hijack function within the application.
I had 4 ideas. While I was typing 3 of them were already suggested (so I upvoted them)
Variant on idea 3 - impersonation:
To make this as "identical as possible" to a normal login with minimal code changes, you might add the ability to impersonate directly at login by supplying Admin credentials plus an alternate username, e.g. login as Admin:user, adminpassword. The system would treat this exactly as logging in as user with userpassword.
Idea 4: Can you access the password store? If so, temporarily replace the user's hash with the hash of a known password. (the passwords are often stored online in a database. A SQL Query tool can do the swaps )
An administrator should be able to change a user's password. Change the password for the user to something you know. You can then log in as that user.
Tell the user to reset his/her password after you are done debugging.
Usually by some sort of remote control software that can be used to view their desktop. If they're on a Windows terminal server, then the built in admin tools can be used for that. Otherwise I'd use something like VNC across an internal network, or an external service like LogMeIn (http://www.logmein.com/).
Could you have a testing environment where there is a regular cut of live data copied to (obviously sanitised to meet any security or data protection issues). A user similar in setup to the one having trouble could be used to troubleshoot or indeed the very user if this is allowed.
Use a remote desktop client as mentioned in other answers, but again this may not be practical for you. If you have these rights within the domain, I have heard of error handling even doing a screenscrape and including this in logs! but this sounds a little odd to me.
Could you have an admin tool to clone a user into a demo account?
The solution we have used in our web apps is to have the authN/authZ return the desired user as the effective user. We do this by having an admin feature to setup a masquerade, and then when we ask for the currently logged in user (current_user), we handle the masquerade:
def current_user_with_effective_user
if masked?
current_user_without_effective_user.masquerade_as
else
current_user_without_effective_user
end
end
alias_method_chain, :current_user, :effective_user