micahlt
[WIP] Implement Scratch Authenticator
PR is a Work In Progress; Implement #70
To-do:
- [x] Backend
- [x] Update
index.js
- [x] Update
- [ ] Frontend
- [ ] Add
auth.html - [ ] Add script to set localstorage in
auth.html
- [ ] Add
- [ ] Test recent changes
Ok I'm done for tonight; I'll add more tmrw. So basically if you don't already understand what's going on, here's a flowchart:
Erm... Isn't the current auth system good enough? I really trust the built-in system more than a shady external one. Especially knowing some of the other contributions you have made to Modchat.
I might just flat out stop using modchat due to privacy issues if this gets implemented.
@CodeLikeCrazE:
Isn't the current auth system good enough?
Actually, no. It's fairly buggy and I'm sure that there are ways to spoof it.
I really trust the built-in system more than a shady external one
Well, we were already planning on adding @Semisol's Scratch OAuth2 when it was finished, but that was because it was going to be hosted by the same people who made the original ScratchVerifier (plus it won't have password login).
Especially knowing some of the other contributions you have made to Modchat
Please remember to be respectful! 😟
@CodeLikeCrazE:
Isn't the current auth system good enough?
Actually, no. It's fairly buggy and I'm sure that there are ways to spoof it.
I really trust the built-in system more than a shady external one
Well, we were already planning on adding @Semisol's Scratch OAuth2 when it was finished, but that was because it was going to be hosted by the same people who made the original ScratchVerifier (plus it won't have password login).
Especially knowing some of the other contributions you have made to Modchat
Please remember to be respectful! 😟
- And yes, it is kinda janky, but can’t you just fix the jankiness instead of using an entirely new auth system?
- Okay. EDIT: I just realized that this means that you won’t be using SOA2...
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
@CodeLikeCrazE:
Isn't the current auth system good enough?
Actually, no. It's fairly buggy and I'm sure that there are ways to spoof it.
I really trust the built-in system more than a shady external one
Well, we were already planning on adding @Semisol's Scratch OAuth2 when it was finished, but that was because it was going to be hosted by the same people who made the original ScratchVerifier (plus it won't have password login).
Especially knowing some of the other contributions you have made to Modchat
Please remember to be respectful! 😟
- And yes, it is kinda janky, but can’t you just fix the jankiness instead of using an entirely new auth system?
- Okay. EDIT: I just realized that this means that you won’t be using SOA2...
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
- It would benefit both my system and modchat by streamlining it
- Eh, yes.
- You don't have to trust me. Give me your Replit username and I will invite you to the same instance that it's being hosted on. If you're worried about passwords, let me just clarify: this is not the only method; it's there so that people that risked their Scratch account to communicate on an external site, and then got banned, are still able to log in even if they can't run a project or post a comment.
- I uploaded the wrong file you're not getting it. I never intended to cause that issue.
- This is arguably even more secure because it can link multiple Scratch applications to one login system, and once I implement an accounts system for my ScratchOAuth2 system, there will be fewer requests to the Scratch API and fewer opportunities for spoofing and vulnerabilities.
@YodaLightsabr I'd highly recommend that you change the name since it looks like plagiarism.
@YodaLightsabr I'd highly recommend that you change the name since it looks like plagiarism.
Yes. :100: Any ideas?
@CodeLikeCrazE:
Isn't the current auth system good enough?
Actually, no. It's fairly buggy and I'm sure that there are ways to spoof it.
I really trust the built-in system more than a shady external one
Well, we were already planning on adding @Semisol's Scratch OAuth2 when it was finished, but that was because it was going to be hosted by the same people who made the original ScratchVerifier (plus it won't have password login).
Especially knowing some of the other contributions you have made to Modchat
Please remember to be respectful! 😟
- And yes, it is kinda janky, but can’t you just fix the jankiness instead of using an entirely new auth system?
- Okay. EDIT: I just realized that this means that you won’t be using SOA2...
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
Okay, kind of a shameless plug but SOA2 is going to be hosted on the wiki, out of my control, even if I wanted.
- I uploaded the wrong file you're not getting it. I never intended to cause that issue.
- This is arguably even more secure because it can link multiple Scratch applications to one login system, and once I implement an accounts system for my ScratchOAuth2 system, there will be fewer requests to the Scratch API and fewer opportunities for spoofing and vulnerabilities.
"This is arguably even more secure because it can link multiple Scratch applications to one login system, and once I implement an accounts system for my ScratchOAuth2 system, there will be fewer requests to the Scratch API and fewer opportunities for spoofing and vulnerabilities."
Same with SOA2.
Also could you maybe read the OAuth2 docs to make sure your implementation exactly matches what the protocol says?
Also could you maybe read the OAuth2 docs to make sure your implementation exactly matches what the protocol says?
It is still in development.
Also could you maybe read the OAuth2 docs to make sure your implementation exactly matches what the protocol says?
It is still in development.
I would not recommend something in development and has not been harshly tested in production.
@micahlt Also, contributor apps open? Also can you please add auth to mod APIs
I would not recommend something in development and has not been harshly tested in production.
And yours is finished? No, it is not.
I would not recommend something in development and has not been harshly tested in production.
And yours is finished? No, it is not.
I am not implementing a PR right now for it. I am just bringing up the issue. You are straight up making a PR to implement functions using untrusted/potentially vulnerable and untested APIs.
I am not implementing a PR right now for it. I am just bringing up the issue.
I'm not sure you understand what WIP means. It's not finished, and it's meant to provide a way to test it out, not immediately put into production.
And the APIs are tested.
Security tested using a lot of attack vectors?
If you know it all, what would that include?
And the APIs are tested.
Security tested using a lot of attack vectors?
If you know it all, what would that include?
Try to break it.
I am open to suggestions and this is not complete. Yes, as with anything, there will be flaws.
And the APIs are tested.
Security tested using a lot of attack vectors?
If you know it all, what would that include?
Try to break it.
I have. And you're welcome to as well.
Also, I kind of have a feeling you are trying to push your solution over mine no matter what. :/
Also, I kind of have a feeling you are trying to push your solution over mine no matter what.
I'm really not. But you're the one making every possible excuse that mine is bad.
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
Can get that, and I would be concerned too.
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
Can get that, and I would be concerned too.
You shouldn't be trusted any more than me. And besides, my code is open source.
- Sorry, I’m just kinda shaky when it comes to “Who can be trusted to host an authentication system?”
Can get that, and I would be concerned too.
You shouldn't be trusted any more than me. And besides, my code is open source.
Your open source claim is NOT VALID. I told you a million times I am open sourcing it after release, this was Ken's decision. Also, I am hosting this on servers out of my control. Well just consider it as "trusting the wiki bureaucrats" and "trusting some random".