FirebaseAuth signin vs linking an anonymous user - firebase

We login users anonymously in our app using FirebaseAuth, and allow them a read-only access to some of our content. At a later point of time the user can decide to login with credentials and have access to more stuff and write user specific data. The question is, do we gain anything by linking the anonymous user with the one with credentials?
Since we do not have any user specific data when the user is anonymous, it looks like a performance overhead (linking and merging seem to be slower) to link/merge as opposed to a plain sign in. Is there a downside to not linking in this scenario?

You will end up with a lot of stale/abandoned anonymous user accounts and if you are saving anonymous user keyed data in your database, that will also need to be cleaned up if you choose to sign in instead of linking.
In that case (sign in instead of linking), you should consider deleting that anonymous user's data.
If you decide the linking flow, you will not run into the above.

Related

restrict unauthenticated users with Firebase

I'm developing a web app backed by Firebase which allows access to its content to only users who have signed up (using firebase auth).
my goal now is to allow unauthenticated users to view the app content but limit their usage (say, unauthenticated users will be able to view x pages per day they will have to sign up to continue their activity on the app).
I was thinking to achieve this by making an anonymous user type and follow his activity with Firestore, but then the question asked is what prevents the user from login in with a new anonymous user over and over again.
another approach that I was looking at is to limit the user actions with a session cookie, but didn't find too much information on how it works with firebase and if it's even possible.
Any suggestions on which approach you would go with?
Implementing anonymous accounts sounds like a good solution to me. Since you'll have two types of users, you can very simply differentiate them, and allow your normal users to see all the content, while the anonymous users see only restricted content.
To achieve this, you have to check each time a users signs in, if it's an anonymous user or not. If it's anonymous then allow him only to load a fixed number of pages. This can be really simply done in your app's code.
I've solved the issue with my #1 approach -
I was thinking to achieve this by making an anonymous user type and
follow his activity with Firestore
I've overcome my concern
but then the question asked is what prevents the user from login in
with a new anonymous user over and over again
by going to firebase console -> Authentication then at a bottom of the page there's advanced settings dialog, where i was able to manage sign-up quota.
this way, a user with certain IP won't be able to recreate anonymous user over and over again on a short period of time and hence abuse my app.

Have one user signup another user with custom fields in firebase/flutter

I am trying to determine if the following scenario is possible with flutter and firebase:
we have users within the company who will be given access to the app, where on the homepage will be a signup another user button where they enter in that user's email and password, they get signed up, and then the original user specifies custom fields for the 2nd user, such as company name, role, position, etc.
Is this possible with flutter and firebase?
Have asked the flutter google group and was told about custom authentications, but from what I see that is just an external authentication system and doesn't show me how to let one user create another users profile with fields.
Any ideas?
The first thing to consider is whether those properties need to be in the user profile at all. The user profile is sent with every request, and should only contain information that is relevant for securing access. If you have additional information to store about the user, you should store it elsewhere (such as in one of Firebase's databases) using the UID of each user as its key.
Assuming that the information is about security (such as the role seems to be, there is no secure way to let one user set security properties (typically referred to as claims) from client-side code. As soon as this is allowed from client-side code, anyone could set such properties for anyone else. That's why setting custom claims for a user is only possible with Firebase's Admin SDKs, which are designed to run in a trusted environment - such as your development machine, a server you control, or Cloud Functions.
There are a few other options, but it's important to realize they're all implemented on top of the above approach.
There is an experimental extension that allows you to set auth claims by writing a document into Firestore, which something like this (JavaScript syntax, but the Flutter code will be similar):
db.collection("user_claims")
.doc("abc123")
.set({
role: "admin",
groups: ["example1", "example2"],
});
Now of course you'll want to make sure that you secure writing to the user_claims collection, as otherwise you'll end up with the same security risk I mentioned in the first paragraph, where everyone can claim any role they want.
Alternatively you can write your own server-side API (for example on Cloud Functions) that you expose to your application, and that then calls the Admin SDK. Here too, it is important to secure access to this API, to ensure only authorized users can call it.

Single firebase login for all users

I'm currently developing a web app using firebase authentication to make sure only authorized users can access the backend (e.g. firestore).
However, I don't really care about differentiating users but just want a single password based login/authentication. Meaning users come to the site, enter the password they know and then they get access to the protected data (e.g. from firestore). No need to create a own account.
However, I don't think firebase auth supports something like that.
What would likely work is just using .htaccess to protect the page and then provide users with anonymous accounts once they can access the app/page.
However, the browser popup caused by this is not nice enough for my purpose, I would prefer a nicely styled password form in the actual browser window.
What I could try is creating one account and sharing the password for that with all users (and set the email in the background). However, I'm not sure whether this works fine (e.g. multiple users being logged in at the same time on the same account).
Am I missing a simple option to implement such a single password based login shared between users?
Or is it e.g. possible to send a password to cloud functions, check it there and return an access token for an anonymous account from there to the user?
You can just create a single Firebase Auth email/password account and share the credentials with everyone. As long as you trust that each user will not share them with anyone else, and you trust that they will not maliciously overwrite each others' data, it should be fine.

how to make singups and signins with different group of users

I am developing an app for my college and there are different types of users called students ,teachers , hod's
etc. When they login, how do I know a teacher logged in, or a student logged in? Is there any function in firestore for role based signups and signins?
I was thinking that when a teacher signs up, I will add a tag end of her uid.username that if username is 'DANIEL' while signup, I will add a tea for teachers and stu for students at the end of the name what they provided.
So when they login i will get the uid and do the string manupulations and get the last three letters so that i can know who logged in so that i can show different UI to Different types of users
Is there any best way to do like this ?
while singning up user enters his username example:"daniel"
i will update that username in uid.username like this "daniel-stu"(if student signed up),"daniel-tea" if techer signsup.
Storing this information in the user's display name can work. You can read it back from there next time, and take action in your application's client-side code. But note that this means that any user can change their role, since they can also call the same code to update their profile. If that is not a concern for your app, then this approach sounds like it would work.
If malicious users should not be able to change their role, then you shouldn't set that role from the client-side application code. In that case, you can set the role from a server (or your development machine, or Cloud Functions) using the Admin SDK. Since the Admin SDK runs in a trusted environment, it has expanded privileges and can update the profile of any user. So the Admin SDK could update the display name of the user in the same way you have in mind.
But this still isn't secure, since you're still setting a property that anyone can modify for their own profile. Again... if that is no problem for your app that is fine, but if the use-case requires that you can rely on the property to be correct, we have to keep looking elsewhere.
The Admin SDK can set additional so-called claims on a user profile that client-side code can't modify. Such claims are for things that affect the permissions of the user, such if the user is an admin, or what role/group your users belong to. This sounds quite close to what you are describing, so can also be used. And this time, only your code that runs in a trusted environment will be able to do so.
Finally, you could store the additional information about a user in the database. It's quite common to have a collection (Users or Profiles) in the database, where you store a document for each user (with the document name being User.uid). You create the document when the user first signs in, and update whenever you need to. You can do this from the client-side code (if there is no need to control what gets written), or from code that runs in a trusted environment (such as your development machine, a server you control, or Cloud Functions) if you do need to keep control. A big advantage of this approach is that all users can potentially see the information in this collection, where the client-side Authentication SDK only allows a user to read their own user profile.
For more on this, see:
Adding new data to firebase users (in which I essentially list the same options with fewer words)
Add extra User Information with firebase (store the information in the realtime database)
Associate Firebase Users to Database Records (also using the realtime database for the additional information)
Cloud Firestore saving additional user data
this video explaining custom claims
and many more previous questions on this topic

How to set the Principal in an ASP.Net app

I am writing a web app for a client. Users will have a one-time key that they will use to initially identify themselves to the app. Once the app verifies that the key is valid it will take them to a page where they can create a normal account to use for all subsequent logins. The create-account page should only be accessible after entering the key and shouldn't be accessible otherwise. I.e, it shouldn't be accessible to users logged in with a normal account.
This is asp.net 3.0 using a custom membership provider.
My plan is to create a temporary account based on the key and authenticate the user with that account. This allows them access to the create-user page (which is protected with a location tag ) where they can create the formal account. I then authenticate them with their new account and delete the temporary account.
The flow is: the user goes to a page where they enter the key. If the key is valid I create the temporary account, call FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie, and redirect to the create-account page. This all works, although it seems a little complicated.
The problem is that the create-user page is available to any authenticated user; I only want it available during the time between entering the key and creating the formal account. So I thought I'd create a special role for the temporary account and make the create-user page accessible only to that role and none other. I created my own Principal object with a special role and tried setting it when I authenticate the temporary account but I can't get that to work.
I'm really hoping I don't have to write a custom role provider just to do this.
How can I make this work? There's gotta be a simpler way!
Why not simply create the real account when they enter the key. Assign it some random name and then let them change the name and other details. Then you don't need the create user page, just the enter key page and an account details editing page. If you're concerned about getting the account details filled in, you could set it up (perhaps via code on a MasterPage) so that incomplete accounts always get redirected to the edit details page until the details are entered.
Or, you could have them enter the required details in addition to the key code on the enter key page and simply use those details when creating the account.
My advice would be to avoid the use of temporary accounts when validating the user. Instead, generate your own logic for validating the sign-up key. Then, at the head of the page, you can check whether the user is an authenticated user (SetAuthCookie has been called) and jump to a different page if this is true.
You may even be able to change the page access to forbid this page to authenticated users (I know you can disable accounts for unauthenticated users but I'm not sure if you can go the other direction).
The key, though, is to avoid relying on the membership provider when, in fact, the user is not yet a member!
Assign an "incomplete" role when authenticating against the temporary token, then restrict access to only that role... when the account is created, send them to a re-login page (terminating the authentication token). This will simplify your security model.

Resources