[ndriscoll]

IIRC a basic oauth social login implementation is ~40 lines of code (assuming you already have things like json parsing). You need to understand what you're doing to make sure you do the necessary validation (e.g. including the nonce from OP), but the part auth0 is doing for you is pretty trivial.

[saurik]

I agree with you, but I think the comment is about replacing Google, not replacing Auth0.

[ndriscoll]

How so? Google is an IdP. It provides the user's identity. Auth0 is a middle layer that (in this case) transforms oauth responses into oauth responses.

The thing you'd replace Google with would be something like oauth client auto-registration so people can use their own oauth server on their domain.

Edit: Oh, I see what you/they mean. That's probably fair, but SSO is actually convenient for people, so it's fair to offer both oauth and user/password login. And dealing with SSO is probably easier than handling passwords, reset flows, etc. Passkeys would also work well here if they weren't so user-hostile.

[stephenr]

> dealing with SSO is probably easier than handling passwords, reset flows, etc.

It's really not that difficult. Yes you need to be aware of risks, and be more careful with the data. But it's not exactly rocket science, and you're never going to end up in a scenario where your users can't login because the login flow is out of your hands, as per the topic of this thread.

[dewey]

> you're never going to end up in a scenario where your users can't login because the login flow is out of your hands

It's more likely that the person re-implementing the SSO flow is making a mistake and the login behaviour is getting messed up than the default Google/Apple SSO implementation that's deployed to billions of users and business critical for many companies that use that kind of SSO internally too.

[stephenr]

> It's more likely that the person re-implementing the SSO flow is making a mistake

The thread has other people confirming the same behaviour - and the description of the issue (preventing a double-submit of a non-idempotent action) is something most web-focused developers learn in their first year.

I don't understand why people assume that the people working at Google/etc are inherently incapable of producing bugs. Go literally invented a new programming language to make their staff less likely to fuck up because they don't have much real world experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwajp0g-bY4

[dewey]

Taking HN thread replies or users as a sample for anything is almost never a good idea.

Even in this thread there's a split between people who can replicate it and people who can't, so it's more likely an edge case and not a global issue affecting all Google SSO implementations.