Show anyway
[quote="wh0, post:2, topic:56112"]
honor system
[/quote]
Honor system?
Of course! Basicaly you input your username and it generates a random code. Then, when you click verify, it fetches Glitch’s open API and looks at your profile description. If the description contains the code, the project jumps over the lazy dog and redirects the user to your website.
well an honorable user would follow the rules of not redirecting if they aren’t the right user. does it have a way to enforce those rules on dishonorable users? could they redirect anyway? in my understanding they can
could an attacker forge an encrypted token to make them look like a different victim user? from what I’ve seen of the code, I’m getting a sense that yes, they can in a reasonable threat model, where the attacker has their own computer.
Show anywayWell... Yes, an attacker could, but there's a catch:
I actually didn't explain, but like you probably aren't going to but big secrets on top of this auth: This is just a way of knowing that *probably* (because of the problem you said) the user has the glitch account ________ and some information about the account.
If you want to use something that actually works, then check out [AuthFlow](https://support.glitch.com/t/authflow-the-simplest-way-to-implement-a-login-system/55829?u=tiagorangel2011): you can use Google's built-in token verification system and make sure the user is real.
GlitchOAuth I think checks the login code on its server, which makes it possible to verify a login without trusting any client, which is much stronger if you’re building a full stack app.
Hi, I really think this is a good idea, but I really think you should make a few changes. As @wh0 said
Assuming he meant that the user is trusted not to go messing with the code, then yeah, I agree
var username = "tiagorangel";
var redirect = "https://example.com";
if (typeof crypt !== "function") {
var crypt = (p, t) => {
t = "oauth";
let r = (t) => t.split("").map((t) => t.charCodeAt(0)),
a = (t) => ("0" + Number(t).toString(16)).substr(-2),
e = (p) => r(t).reduce((t, p) => t ^ p, p);
return p.split("").map(r).map(e).map(a).join("");
};
}
fetch(`https://api.glitch.com/v1/users/by/login?login=${username}`)
.then((res) => res.json())
.then((response) => {
var token = crypt(JSON.stringify(response));
window.location.replace(
`${redirect}?token=${token}&login_provider=oauth-login&provider_url=example.com`
);
});
})
This code could be injected at the login screen, bypassing any means of authentication.
Maybe you could move the actual login/verification to a backend server and give the client a token to interact with the backend with, sort of like pocketbase and its JavaScript library. Basically what the library does is:
It submits the credentials to the server
The server gives a token and the client stores it in localStorage
The library interacts with the client using that token
Although, the way your project works, step one would probably be setting a login token in the description.
Show anyway
Ooops, it seems like there are a lot of security problems here!
The big problem is keeping the site static and 24/7 awake, because I don't want users to keep looking at the loading screen for 3 hours
I am currently working to improve the security of this, anyway thanks!
***
**EDIT:** Implemented IIFE, minified javascript, and obfuscated some code (sorry glitch, please don't report my project!).
Obfuscating code is not really a good way of implementing security. Instead, you should write safe code in the first place (irrespective of whether you ‘have to’ write the code in some way to keep it static).
Show anyway
[quote="EddiesTech, post:14, topic:56112"]
(irrespective of whether you ‘have to’ write the code in some way to keep it static).
[/quote]
Unfortunately...
[quote="tiagorangel2011, post:13, topic:56112"]
because I don’t want users to keep looking at the loading screen for 3 hours
[/quote]
I’d rather prioritize my user’s security over speed. For example, I make some sort of twitter clone where I authenticate users via Glitch. If a user’s login could easily be easily forged, then I could pretend to be that user. Also, I agree with EddiesTech as I used a deobfuscator which allowed me to grab a basic concept on how the code worked. Someone really malicious could do the same thing.
@_tr Also, apart from the security issues, I’m having an incredibly difficult time authenticating myself anyways. Glitch simply won’t let me put login:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in my description! Apparently it thinks that login:xxxxxx is a link, and since it doesn’t start with http(s), it may be malicious. I can’t find any form of markdown to prevent it from failing me (code blocks, tables, backslash-escapes). This can be considered a bug.