[lstamour]

It's fair to say that with OAuth the resource owner can choose to display a consent screen or not. For example, when consent is granted already, it can be skipped if the resource owner does not need it. Likewise, Google Workspace and other enterprise services that use OAuth can configure in advance which apps are trusted and thus skip permission grants.

Not to say the concern about redirects isn't legitimate, but there are other ways of handling this. Even redirects aren't necessary if OAuth is implemented in a browser-less or embedded browser fashion, e.g. SFAuthenticationSession for one non-standard example. I haven't looked this up in awhile but I believe the OAuth protocol was being extended more and more to other contexts beyond the browser - e.g. code flow or new app-based flows and even QR auth flows for TV or sharing prompts.

(Note I am not commenting on OpenAUTH, just OAuth in general. It's complex, yes, but not as bad as it might seem at first glance. It's just not implemented in a standard way across every provider. Something like PassKeys might one day replace it.)

[portaouflop]

> Even redirects aren't necessary if OAuth is implemented in a browser-less or embedded browser fashion, e.g. SFAuthenticationSession

Can you please expand on that or give me some hints what to look at? I have never heard of this before and I work with Oauth2 a lot.

When I look for SFAuthenticationSession it seems to be specific to Safari and also deprecated.

I always share this article because people overimplement OAuth2 for everything, it’s not a hammer: https://www.ory.sh/oauth2-openid-connect-do-you-need-use-cas...

[lstamour]

For browserless, I was referring to a 2019 article that I could have sworn was newer than that, on the need for OAuth 2.1 that also covers how they added OAuth for Native Apps (Code Flow) and basically a QR code version for TVs: https://aaronparecki.com/2019/12/12/21/its-time-for-oauth-2-...

As for SFAuthenticationSession, again my info might be outdated, but the basic idea is that there are often native APIs that can load OAuth requests in a way that doesn’t require you to relogin. Honestly most of those use cases have been deprecated by PassKeys at an operating system level. There’s (almost) no need for a special browser with cookies to your favourite authenticated services if you have PassKeys to make logging in more painless.

[portaouflop]

Thanks for sharing!

I agree that passkeys would solve all that, but they have their own set of problems (mainly being bound to a device) and they are still very far from being universally adopted.

I’m looking forward to OAuth2.1 - at the moment it is still in draft stage, so it will take a couple more years until it’s done and providers start implementing.

My prediction is that passwords will be around for a long time, at least the next 10 years.

[lstamour]

PassKeys are definitely the future, they aren't just device-specific, they can be synced also. https://www.corbado.com/blog/nist-passkeys talks about this, though I'll admit I haven't read anything on the subject yet. But I can say that most implementations of PassKeys seem to cloud sync, including 1Password, Apple, Google, Edge, etc.

I should also add that PassKeys that are tied to devices are like FIDO2 security keys, you should be able to add more than one to your account so that you can login with a backup if your primary FIDO2 token is unavailable.

Likewise, SSO should ideally be implemented such that you can link more than one social network - and a standard email address or backup method - in addition to the primary method you might use to login with. It has always bugged me that Auth0 makes it much harder than it should be to link multiple methods of login to an account, by default.

[bchilcott]

The biggest issue I've seen organisations facing with PassKeys is that neither iOS or Android require biometrics to unlock one - this seems like a massive drawback.

Most apps wanting extra authentication implement biometrics which fall back to an app-specific knowledge based credential like a PIN or password. As far as I can tell, PassKeys on those devices fall back to the device PIN which in the case of family PCs/iPads/tablets is known to the whole household.

I've seen several organisations give up on them for this reason.

[ash]

The article by Ory's Aeneas Rekkas perfectly describes OAuth / OIDC problems. The only thing it misses is the suggestion for the alternative protocol for first-party auth. It does suggest that it's preferable to use simpler systems like Ory Kratos. But OAuth / OIDC is a set of protocols, not an implementation. Is there an a effort to specify simple auth protocol, when third-party auth is not needed?

[lstamour]

It can vary by implementation need. Can you send a time-limited secret as a login link to someone's email as a replacement to entering or managing passwords? Can you use PassKeys? Or a simple username and password? (Password storage and management is left as an exercise to the reader.)

Part of the question is - why present a login? Do you need an identity? Do you need to authorize an action? How long should it last?

Generally, today, PassKeys are the "simple" authentication mechanism, if you don't need a source of third-party identity or can validate an email address yourself. (Though once you implement email validation, it is arguable that email validation is a perfectly simple and valid form of authentication, it just takes a bit more effort on the part of the user to login, particularly if they can't easily access email on the device they are trying to login on, though even then you can offer a short code they could enter instead.)

Frankly, the conclusion to "how to login" that I draw today is that you will inevitably end up having to support multiple forms of login, including in apps, browsers and by email. It seems inevitable then that you will end up needing more than one approach as a convenience to the end user depending on the device they are trying to sign in to, and their context (how necessary is it that they must be signed in manually vs using a magic link or secret or QR code or just click a link in their email).

I should also note that I haven't discussed much about security standards here in detail. Probably because I'm trying to highlight that login is primarily a UX concern, and security is intertwined but can also be considered an implementation detail. The most secure system is probably hard to access, so UX can sometimes be a tradeoff between security and ease-of-access to a system. It's up to your implementation how secure you might need to be.

To some, you can use a web-based VPN or an authenticating proxy in front of your app, and just trust the header that comes along. Or you could put your app behind Tailscale or another VPN that requires authentication and never login a user. It's all up to what requirements the app has, and the context of the user/device accessing it.

[mffap]

It's probably going to be vendor-specific or you will implement your own auth. At ZITADEL we decided to offer all the standards like OIDC and SAML, and offer a session API for more flexible auth scenarios. You will also be able to mix.