Resolve "Support custom authentication backends" #1979
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
Security
TeX
auto-update
board
done
board
ready
board
todo
check
delete-eslint-rc-js
check
update-builddeps-package-json
check
update-eslint-rc-js
check
update-gitignore
check
update-merge-request-template
check
update-prettier-ignore
check
update-pyproject-toml
check
update-renovate-json
check
update-tox-ini
part
backend
part
ci
part
docs
part
frontend
part
i18n
part
non-technical
part
packaging
prio
1
prio
2
prio
3
release-mr-5.x
size
large
size
medium
size
small
source
customer
source
customer::fsmw
source
customer::fss
source
customer::teckids
source
downstream
type
breaking
type
bug
type
feature
type
refactoring
workflow
blocked
workflow
confirmed
workflow
current-todo
workflow
discussing
workflow
new-app
workflow
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
aleksis/AlekSIS-Core!1979
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "feature/custom-auth-backends"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Close #295
This MR is lacking screenshots and a related issue. Please open a feature request issue and outlay the idea behind this, the current use cases, and security considerations (e.g. how do you prevent a malicious app from wreaking havoc? Consider attack chains — i.e. some third-party, or even official, app is replaced by malicious code, how do you keep the impact small? This change potentially allows an app to completely disable authentication.)
changed title from {-Custom authentication backends-} to {+Resolve "Support custom authentication backends"+}
changed the description
I understand that you're concerned about security risks. But actually an app can provide a public view which internally creates an user and logins the user directly – the authentication is completely disabled, too. Please help me to understand how this differs.
Have you ever done a code audit?
Some things (like calling createsuperuser()) are easier to spot than swapping if/else in an authentication conditional ;).
As you can imagine, no, I have never done.
I have multiple possible ideas:
Having a whitelist is site preferences seems like a good step.
added 1 commit
71b3c2ad- Make custom authentication backends configurable via site preferencesCompare with previous version
OK, I did some work on this topic.
resolved all threads
With alternative login options
Without alternative login options
Please add a test case that tries to add a backend and login using this backend, without enabling it in site preferences.
aborted the automatic merge because source branch was updated
added 1 commit
5680c5d0- Provide alternativ login options as backend list, tooCompare with previous version
added 1 commit
b20a9566- Add test for custom authentication backends and fix a little bitCompare with previous version
Done.
resolved all threads
mentioned in commit
4e6ceb0fe8merged
mentioned in merge request !2104