any_oauth_backend_enabled is all about whether we will have extra
buttons on the login/register pages for logging in with some non-native
backends (like Github, Google etc.). And this isn't about specifically
oauth backends, but generally "social" backends - that may not rely
specifically rely on Oauth. This will have more concrete relevance when
SAML authentication is added - which will be a "social" backend,
requiring an additional button, but not Oauth-based.
SOCIAL_AUTH_BACKEND / OAUTH_BACKEND_NAMES are currently the same
backends. All Oauth backends are social, and all social are oauth.
So we get rid of OAUTH_BACKEND_NAMES and use only SOCIAL_AUTH_BACKENDS.
Also cleans up the interface between the management command and the
LDAP backends code to not guess/recompute under what circumstances
what should be logged.
Co-authored-by: mateuszmandera <mateusz.mandera@protonmail.com>
The order of operations for our LDAP synchronization code wasn't
correct: We would run the code to sync avatars (etc.) even for
deactivated users.
Thanks to niels for the report.
Co-authored-by: mateuszmandera <mateusz.mandera@protonmail.com>
Fixes#13130.
django_auth_ldap doesn't give any other way of detecting that LDAPError
happened other than catching the signal it emits - so we have to
register a receiver. In the receiver we just raise our own Exception
which will properly propagate without being silenced by
django_auth_ldap. This will stop execution before the user gets
deactivated.
For the emails that are associated to an existing account in an
organisation, the avatars will be displayed in the email selection
page. This includes avatar data in what is passed to the page.
Added `avatar_urls` to the context in `test_templates.py`.
Apparently GitHub changed the email address for these; we need to
update our code accordingly.
One cannot receive emails on the username@users.noreply.github.com, so
if someone tries creating an account with this email address, that
person would not be able to verify the account.
This replaces the two custom Google authentication backends originally
written in 2012 with using the shared python-social-auth codebase that
we already use for the GitHub authentication backend. These are:
* GoogleMobileOauth2Backend, the ancient code path for mobile
authentication last used by the EOL original Zulip Android app.
* The `finish_google_oauth2` code path in zerver/views/auth.py, which
was the webapp (and modern mobile app) Google authentication code
path.
This change doesn't fix any known bugs; its main benefit is that we
get to remove hundreds of lines of security-sensitive semi-duplicated
code, replacing it with a widely trusted, high quality third-party
library.
Previously, our Github authentication backend just used the user's
primary email address associated with GitHub, which was a reasonable
default, but quite annoying for users who have several email addresses
associated with their GitHub account.
We fix this, by adding a new screen where users can select which of
their (verified) GitHub email addresses to use for authentication.
This is implemented using the "partial" feature of the
python-social-auth pipeline system.
Each email is displayed as a button. Clicking on that button chooses
the email. The email value is stored in a hidden input above the
button. The `primary_email` is displayed on top followed by
`verified_non_primary_emails`. Backend name is also passed as
`backend` to the template, which in our case is GitHub.
Fixes#9876.
This fixes an issue that caused LDAP synchronization to fail for
avatars. The problem occurred due to the lack of a 'name' attribute
on the BytesIO object that we pass to the upload backend (which is
only used in the S3 backend for computing Content-Type).
Fixes#12411.
Since positional arguments are interpreted differently by different
backends in Django's authentication backend system, it’s safer to
disallow them.
This had been the motivation for previously declaring the parameters
with default values when we were on Python 2, but that was not super
effective because Python has no rule against positional default
arguments and that convention for our authentication backends was
solely enforced by code review.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This makes the implementation of `get_realm` consistent with its
declared return type of `Realm` rather than `Optional[Realm]`.
Fixes#12263.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This avoids repeatedly calling a Django auth function that takes a few
hundred microseconds to run in auth_enabled_helper, which itself is
currently called 14 times in every request to pages using
common_context.
Previously, the LDAP authentication model ignored the realm-level
settings for who can join a realm. This was sort of reasonable at the
time, because the original LDAP auth was an SSO solution that didn't
allow multiple realms, and so one could fully configure authentication
settings on the LDAP side. But now that we allow multiple realms with
the LDAP backend, one could easily imagine wanting different
restrictions on them, and so it makes sense to add this enforcement.
Now that we've more or less stabilized our authentication/registration
subsystem how we want it, it seems worth adding proper documentation
for this.
Fixes#7619.
Earlier the behavior was to raise an exception thereby stopping the
whole sync. Now we log an error message and skip the field. Also
fixes the `query_ldap` command to report missing fields without
error.
Fixes: #11780.
For Google auth, the multiuse invite key should be stored in the
csrf_state sent to google along with other values like is_signup,
mobile_flow_otp.
For social auth, the multiuse invite key should be passed as params to
the social-auth backend. The passing of the key is handled by
social_auth pipeline and made available to us when the auth is
completed.
We had an inconsistent behavior when `LDAP_APPEND_DOMAIN` was set
in that we allowed user to enter username instead of his email in
the auth form but later the workflow failed due to a small bug.
Fixes: #10917.
This should make life a lot more convenient for organizations that use
the LDAP integration and have their avatars in LDAP already.
This hasn't been end-to-end tested against LDAP yet, so there may be
some minor revisions, but fundamentally, it works, has automated
tests, and should be easy to maintain.
Fixes#286.
