Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Additional login providers #97

Closed
6 tasks
patcon opened this issue Dec 1, 2016 · 14 comments
Closed
6 tasks

Additional login providers #97

patcon opened this issue Dec 1, 2016 · 14 comments

Comments

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor

patcon commented Dec 1, 2016

Right now, we have sign-in via:

  • admin interface: Facebook or email
  • participation interface: Facebook or Twitter

What other auth providers could or should we consider implementing?

To Do Candidates

  • Add Google auth
    • For admin login
    • For participant login (highest priority)
  • Add Twitter auth for admin login
  • Add extensible login system, e.g. Join.tw (very low priority)
  • Add OpenID Connect

This issue body was replaced on 2020-06-12.

@colinmegill
Copy link
Member

colinmegill commented Dec 1, 2016 via email

@patcon patcon transferred this issue from pol-is/polis-issues May 10, 2020
@crkrenn
Copy link
Contributor

crkrenn commented May 23, 2020 via email

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jun 13, 2020

Seem OpenID is barely alive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenID

I'm going to re-scope this from only OpenID, to discussion of additional auth providers. That sound ok?

@patcon patcon changed the title Add OpenID as an auth provider Additional login providers Jun 13, 2020
@patcon patcon added the ♿ accessibility Re: inclusion, accessibility & localization. label Jun 13, 2020
@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jun 13, 2020

@colinmegill says Google is top priority next: https://gitter.im/pol-is/polisDeployment?at=5ee426f82cf2f36eae57823f

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jun 15, 2020

From @joshsmith2 in chat 🙌 🙏 : https://wearesocial.com/blog/2020/01/digital-2020-3-8-billion-people-use-social-media (lots of good stuff, but a little scarce on "social login" details, at least in 2020 version)

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jul 29, 2020

Added potential todo to issue body:

  • Add Twitter auth for admin login

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jul 29, 2020

From @colinmegill 💬 in gitter chat:

I anticipate we’ll end up with Twitter Facebook Google and ‘vanilla polis login'. And maybe hooks for custom systems that make it easier to implement without forking — ie., Join in Taiwan. I've never seen [a hooks system] and don’t know the right pattern. [...] I think it’s appropriate to at least consider given the integration of @urakagi’s work.


Some other thoughts on extensibility/pluggability and forking are in the linked chat convo. Added new todo

  • Add extensible login system, e.g. Join.tw (very low priority)

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Jul 29, 2020

@petersg83
Copy link

petersg83 commented Jun 4, 2021

Hi,
I would really enjoy that people have the possibility to authenticate without using a private company such as twitter or facebook.
The email is the best way for that I think.
In order to guarentee that the contributor can't make several accounts, there are different possibilities I see:

  • If the discussion targets people inside a company/institution:
    Participants can only register with their company/institution email (ex: firstname.lastname@myinstitution.com)
    (or among a set of email domains)
  • If the discussion targets random people:
    The creator of the discussion is the one handling uniqueness by giving codes to the participants. A code can be used once to create an account on pol.is for this specific discussion. The creator decides how to give thoses codes (regarding an existing database of users for example, or by checking ids etc.).

At the same time of adding more flexibility to the loggin system, it also brings the feature of limiting a discussion to a specific set of contibutors.
What do you think?

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Aug 30, 2021

Related: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis-examples/issues/2#issuecomment-907884261

tl;dr - not a fully integrated solution, but as a workaround, added example of how to use any arbitrary auth provider for gating polis convo access (via Auth0 SaaS provider) by using a simple HTML website functioning as a wrapper app around a polis embed :)

@burnoutberni
Copy link

Because OpenID is mentioned above: The de-facto standard today is OpenID Connect, which is gradually replacing SAML and is supported both by cloud authentication providers (Google, Auth0, Okta,…) and FLOSS alternatives like Shibboleth, Keycloak,…

I haven't looked into the code base yet, but this should be rather easy to implement, but very versatile: https://betterprogramming.pub/the-complete-guide-to-oauth-2-0-and-openid-connect-protocols-35ebc1cbc11a

@MauiJerry
Copy link

Related: https://github.com/compdemocracy/polis-examples/issues/2#issuecomment-907884261
As of Dec2023 there is no polis-examples repository listed publically.

@metasoarous
Copy link
Member

After internal discussion, the only version of this we'd consider is to support OpenID Connect, and even that may be a stretch. As such, I'm closing this issuing and opening #1750 as a more scoped down version of the issue. Please feel free to continue discussion there. Thanks!

@petersg83
Copy link

Thank you for the update ! Could you say if you considered email login with a domain filter? and if yes, why you decided to not support this? Thank you

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants