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

Password on transaction flow #1638

Closed
2 of 3 tasks
faboweb opened this issue Nov 25, 2018 · 12 comments
Closed
2 of 3 tasks

Password on transaction flow #1638

faboweb opened this issue Nov 25, 2018 · 12 comments
Labels
design-work-needed 🎨 issues that require design work before development epic high priority ❗ security 🛡️ split 🍌 issues that need to be split into several smaller issues with reduced scope

Comments

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator

faboweb commented Nov 25, 2018

As of user feedback we decided to not persist the password in the state. As a result we will ask the password on every transaction.

Scope:

@faboweb faboweb added security 🛡️ high priority ❗ design-work-needed 🎨 issues that require design work before development labels Nov 25, 2018
@jbibla
Copy link
Collaborator

jbibla commented Nov 26, 2018

On login the user doesn't need to enter a password

i think we should let users choose if they want this

@cwgoes
Copy link

cwgoes commented Nov 26, 2018

Different users may have different requirements. For me this would make a lot of sense, for two reasons:

  • Often I might open Voyager just to view state / check if I've received a transaction, for which I will never need my password (or Ledger).
  • When I do in fact send transactions, I want to double-check each before I send (lest I click a button by mistake) and I don't mind being prompted for my password each time (I'd rather be, since it's clearer that I'm "signing something").

I think it also helps with application security, since we no longer need to persist the password in state (so any kind of code injection wouldn't be able to copy it, although they could still display false things to the user).

@jbibla
Copy link
Collaborator

jbibla commented Nov 26, 2018

thanks for the input @cwgoes! i think this makes a lot of sense and was excited to hear the idea!!

Often I might open Voyager just to view state

true, but i feel some folks might like the comfort of knowing that if someone else uses their computer or if they are on a public machine that a password will be required to view "their state"

voyager on the web will provide a hub-wide state view - but for accounts which include an account name and certain preferences over time, this could feel like an invasion of sorts. that's why i like giving the user the option (a checkbox that asks whether or not they want to enter their password to view their state)...

we no longer need to persist the password in state

yep. this sounds great.

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

faboweb commented Nov 26, 2018

isn't the state public anyway?

@jbibla
Copy link
Collaborator

jbibla commented Nov 26, 2018

technically, yes. but "logging in as someone else" doesn't feel right. what your proposing would mean you could pick any address and use voyager as if it were your own account ... right?

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

faboweb commented Nov 27, 2018

you could pick any address and use voyager as if it were your own account

yeah, let's discuss today

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

faboweb commented Nov 27, 2018

Note: This would probably mean 2 passwords. One for the local account. One for the private key. Am I correct?

@jbibla
Copy link
Collaborator

jbibla commented Nov 27, 2018

good question - we'll discuss!

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

faboweb commented Nov 27, 2018

  • we have one password for the private key (for signing)
  • we have no password for the settings (for logging in)
  • we auto login
  • we sign on a transaction

@faboweb faboweb added epic split 🍌 issues that need to be split into several smaller issues with reduced scope and removed discuss labels Nov 27, 2018
@faboweb faboweb assigned faboweb and fedekunze and unassigned faboweb Nov 27, 2018
@fedekunze
Copy link
Contributor

Often I might open Voyager just to view state / check if I've received a transaction, for which I will never need my password (or Ledger).

That's true, we can include that behaviour once we merge in the explorer as the read-only version of voyager. I'll create an issue.

@fedekunze
Copy link
Contributor

On login the user doesn't need to enter a password
We could just remember the last login and skip the login screen (yeah!)

I'd change this to remember the last address for querying purposes

@faboweb
Copy link
Collaborator Author

faboweb commented Feb 25, 2019

The last feature needs more thinking is handled in #1953

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
design-work-needed 🎨 issues that require design work before development epic high priority ❗ security 🛡️ split 🍌 issues that need to be split into several smaller issues with reduced scope
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants