-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
MojoAuth Module #525
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
MojoAuth Module #525
Conversation
89a7aff
to
5603ceb
Compare
47c7494
to
83c3199
Compare
This should be good to merge along with #524. Would it be possible to include in 15.05? |
Is there any chance this might be reviewed for inclusion? |
Node uptime metric
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ register_mechanism(Mechanism, Module, PasswordType) -> | |||
%% end. | |||
|
|||
check_credentials(_State, Props) -> | |||
User = proplists:get_value(username, Props, <<>>), | |||
User = proplists:get_value(authzid, Props, <<>>), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changing parameters name: Doesn't it break other form of authentication ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tested both internal auth and LDAP auth, along with anonymous using this change and didn't have any problems.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, that's strange that changing parameter name has no impact :/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not really. These parameters are normally the same.
I think the main problem is that patch is big and may break some other form of authentication. The second problem is that the ejabberd community does probably not know how to test the patch to check it is working, even less how to maintain it and fix bugs in case of issues. We want to consider it, but we would need to understand and master it. We had never heard of MojoAuthentication before. |
Even if the PR this is based on could be merged, that would be something. That PR does not introduce MojoAuth, but simply makes ejabberd more SASL compatible by allowing authentication modules to differentiate between authcid and authzid. |
ok, we will try to compare with the SASL part. However, probably considering integration would probably be in two parts: API changes on ejabberd core and mojo authentication module itself possibly at first in ejabberd contribs. |
👍 |
83c3199
to
3452cbf
Compare
Rebased for an eventual merge. In the meantime I'll prep a PR to get this into ejabberd-contrib until such time as it's eligible for core. |
Permits use of MojoAuth (http://mojoauth.mojolingo.com/) in ejabberd. MojoAuth is a set of standard approaches to cross-app authentication based on HMAC which is specified in RFC2104.
3452cbf
to
8e053e1
Compare
@benlangfeld Maybe this helps ? |
I saw that, thank you to everyone involved in getting that merged @mremond :) |
@benlangfeld Is there any ETA on MojoAuth? I'm sure I'm not the only one that hates having to choose between SIP/TURN authentication and SCRAM passwords... |
@benlangfeld Always possible for 18.12+? |
I don’t have a need for this right now, but if anyone else has the time to push it across the finish line, be my guest. |
If needed for faster inclusion, it can be applied to ejabberd-contrib instead. |
@badlop: It can be added in ejabberd-contrib? |
If it works correctly with recent ejabberd, yes, it can be added. |
Permits use of MojoAuth (http://mojoauth.mojolingo.com/) in ejabberd. MojoAuth is a set of standard approaches to cross-app authentication based on HMAC which is specified in RFC2104.