[HN Gopher] Auth0 OSS alternative Ory Kratos now with passwordle...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Auth0 OSS alternative Ory Kratos now with passwordless and SMS
       support
        
       Author : oporquinho94
       Score  : 181 points
       Date   : 2024-02-22 11:41 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
       | > SMS support
       | 
       | I thought it was well-established that SMS text messages should
       | not be used for authentication purposes?
       | 
       | Here's the original feature-request:
       | https://github.com/ory/kratos/issues/1570 - user @zepatrik raised
       | concerns about this and everyone else just ignored him. Yikes.
        
         | konha wrote:
         | Right. But for validation they can still be useful if you need
         | a way to prevent (or at least hinder) users to create lots of
         | accounts.
        
         | scaglio wrote:
         | Yes, exactly. SMS should be an option because it is _obsolete_
         | , and therefore unsecure.
        
         | YetAnotherNick wrote:
         | Everyone says this here, but no one has shown any concrete
         | proof that SMS could be hacked more easily than say TOTP.
        
           | vmfunction wrote:
           | there are tons of articles here in HN that have shown that
           | SIM swamp (at least in US) is much easier then trying to
           | brute force (or using quantum computer) to break TOTP
           | encryption. One of main reason for SMS is also meta data
           | collection of your number.
        
             | YetAnotherNick wrote:
             | Give some examples then. I can't find any article.
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | You can use social engineering (or corrupted workers) to
           | issue SIM card for other people and receive SMS. This method
           | is widely used to steal money from bank accounts in my
           | country. Telegram accounts also known to be stolen this way.
           | 
           | Of course you should be located in the same country. But it's
           | a risk nonetheless.
        
           | rad_gruchalski wrote:
           | You haven't looked for any proof: search for sim cloning.
        
             | YetAnotherNick wrote:
             | In the first link:
             | 
             | > In SIM cloning attack, the fraudster gains access to the
             | victims physical SIM card and..
             | 
             | Same thing could be done with TOTP.
        
           | computerfriend wrote:
           | SMS is better than nothing, but I personally know several
           | people who had their accounts compromised because their SMS
           | 2FA codes were intercepted. It's not possible to do this with
           | TOTP.
        
             | mooreds wrote:
             | How were they intercepted? Was it a sim takeover, where the
             | attacker took over the phone number? Or intercepting the
             | code over the air, since SMS has no encryption?
        
               | computerfriend wrote:
               | The latter.
        
               | YetAnotherNick wrote:
               | How can I someone see other's messages? Surely someone
               | has step by step guide if it is that easy. Are you sure
               | it was interception without SIM takeover?
        
               | TheNewsIsHere wrote:
               | It's not that you can do this just from any old device by
               | flipping a built-in switch, but it's not that different
               | from observing plaintext traffic over an Ethernet network
               | with the right software.
               | 
               | There are various ways to nab an SMS. Some are similar to
               | SIM swap attacks in that they rely on social engineering
               | or human or process fallibility to execute [1] [2], and
               | others can grab messages right right out of the air, so
               | to speak [3] [4]. This is in part because one of the
               | foundational protocols that underlie modern cellular
               | networks was never designed with modern security in mind.
               | It's called SS7, and it's been extensively documented as
               | a concern to the security of cellular based
               | communications [5] [6] [7] [8].
               | 
               | Lot's of references because this is an area that has long
               | fascinated me, and I have many bookmarks. There are also
               | some recent papers on this behind paywalls (e.g., [9]).
               | 
               | In between the lines and lightly touched on in some
               | reporting is a nuanced point that I think plays a larger
               | part - one issue is that overhauling these older
               | foundational technologies isn't just a matter of
               | commercial and standards changes but also moving the goal
               | posts on where lawful interception happens in the stack,
               | how it happens, and the technologies that support that.
               | For example in the U.S., law enforcement agencies can
               | acquire devices that impersonate cellular infrastructure
               | in order to force communications to go through law
               | enforcement controlled equipment (called IMSI catchers).
               | If we were to revamp cellular networks with a view toward
               | security in the way we probably should, it's reasonable
               | that devices like that wouldn't be feasible without being
               | operated by the telephone companies that own the
               | networks, and that would probably become some amount of
               | red tape that law enforcement doesn't like.
               | 
               | [1] https://arstechnica.com/information-
               | technology/2021/03/16-at...
               | 
               | [2] https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/can-we-stop-
               | pretending-s...
               | 
               | [3] https://www.firstpoint-mg.com/blog/ss7-attack-guide/
               | 
               | [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXBvO8TWGsw
               | 
               | [5] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/19/ss
               | 7-hack-...
               | 
               | [6] https://arstechnica.com/information-
               | technology/2018/05/nefar...
               | 
               | [7] https://arstechnica.com/features/2019/04/fully-
               | compromised-c...
               | 
               | [8] https://www.zdnet.com/article/5g-networks-could-be-
               | vulnerabl...
               | 
               | [9] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11235-023-
               | 01018-0
               | 
               | edit: formatting
        
               | YetAnotherNick wrote:
               | Again, I want the tool through which I can see other
               | people's messages, or at least a video of some hacker
               | doing that. e.g. I can observe plaintext message over
               | ethernet by using some splitter and wireshark.
        
             | achandlerwhite wrote:
             | So they had weak passwords? Or were their accounts
             | recovered/reset via SMS which is prevalent but not 2nd
             | factor login.
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/31/20841448/jack-dorsey-
           | twit...
           | 
           | https://www.axios.com/2024/01/22/sec-hack-twitter-x-sim-swap
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | > _no one has shown any concrete proof that SMS could be
           | hacked more easily_
           | 
           | On the contrary, here is an empirical study demonstrating
           | 100% of the 5 major carriers in US used insecure
           | authentication challenges that can easily be subverted by
           | attackers:
           | 
           | https://www.issms2fasecure.com
        
         | arekkas wrote:
         | Yes, this is definitely true. However, there are use cases and
         | companies who rely on SMS based two-factor:
         | 
         | - Using SMS for phone verification
         | 
         | - Using SMS for mobile login (think dating apps for example)
         | 
         | - Using SMS for two-factor where other factors are not
         | available / convenient (often in emerging markets)
         | 
         | SIM Swap Attack, SIM Port Hacking are all real, but as always
         | in security it comes down to your threat model to decide what's
         | acceptable risk and what isn't.
         | 
         | Hope this makes sense (maintainer here).
        
           | asdaq1312512 wrote:
           | > - Using SMS for mobile login (think dating apps for
           | example)
           | 
           | Dating apps in particular seem to be a problematic example to
           | me. In some regions, phone numbers change owners quite easily
           | (e.g., no possibility to port a phone number to a new
           | contract, and quick re-cycling of the phone number when a
           | contract is terminated).
        
             | zinekeller wrote:
             | To be fair, it really depends on the region you're
             | operating. Some regions (like most places in Asia) use this
             | as the primary identifier (instead of email), so despite
             | the _very obvious_ security flaws you might be simply be
             | forced to offer it.
        
               | jhugo wrote:
               | Right, by this point the global norm is to rarely, if
               | ever, use email (or a computer larger than a smartphone)
               | unless you work in an office (and in some places not even
               | then). The phone number is the primary identifier for
               | mass-market apps in most countries.
        
           | ravenstine wrote:
           | Plus you have to consider the amount of support you inherit
           | when using something less universal (and generally fool-
           | proof) than SMS.
           | 
           | "The one-time code won't work!"
           | 
           | "The authenticator app doesn't work!"
           | 
           | "The email takes forever to arrive!"
           | 
           | "I never got the email!"
           | 
           | Most of that sort of thing goes away with SMS. It's not that
           | SMS never fails, but every mobile device takes it, it's
           | relatively simple, and very reliable. An alternative approach
           | may be more secure, but require more hand holding, and not
           | every organization wants to do that.
           | 
           | In a similar vein, it's not necessarily prudent to do
           | everything that infosec experts espouse. For an analogy,
           | businesses should consult lawyers, but if they follow every
           | bit of advice from a zealous lawyer, they might never take
           | necessary risks that allow the business to achieve
           | excellence; as well, they may need to dedicate substantially
           | more time and effort on compliance.
        
             | skinner927 wrote:
             | Meanwhile, the AT&T mobile network is down in the US, heh.
             | 
             | I do agree with your statements.
        
               | ravenstine wrote:
               | Gotta admit, it's a funny coincidence. _Stupendous
               | timing, AT &T._
        
           | andix wrote:
           | It's not just emerging markets. Many people are not capable
           | of setting up authenticator apps, not everyone is a "techy"
           | and not everyone is smart. Those people use the internet too.
           | 
           | SMS token is something that is much easier to use. 2FA with
           | SMS is still a lot of added security in comparison to no
           | second factor at all. Especially for people who use insecure
           | passwords.
        
             | ofrzeta wrote:
             | > Many people are not capable of setting up authenticator
             | apps, not everyone is a "techy" and not everyone is smart.
             | 
             | That might be true but on the other hand most companies
             | using Teams etc. will be introducing 2FA with the MS
             | Authenticator App. Techie or not, you need to install an
             | app and scan a QR code.
        
               | andix wrote:
               | Once again, not every person using the internet is
               | working for a company.
               | 
               | If you don't know anyone that will just laugh at you when
               | you tell them "it's super easy, you just need to install
               | an app and scan a QR code", then you're living inside a
               | bubble. Every year at my mums birthday party her friends
               | already queue up in front of me, so I can install some
               | apps for them.
        
             | Terretta wrote:
             | It doesn't "add" security, it "adds" an account takeover
             | path.
        
               | andix wrote:
               | How is a second factor adding an "account takeover path"?
               | You're not seriously saying that adding a second factor
               | is reducing security?
               | 
               | We can agree that password reset via SMS token is bad. It
               | basically reduces everything to one factor login via SMS.
        
               | Terretta wrote:
               | I agree with you, SMS as implemented almost _everywhere_
               | * is bad, adding an account takeover path (the reset by
               | SMS) with insufficient value-add to offset that 100%
               | guaranteed (see research I linked elsewhere in thread)
               | path to account takeover.
               | 
               | And as to "You're not seriously saying that adding a
               | second factor is reducing security?" -- yes I am, when
               | it's not a second factor, it's implemented as an "only
               | factor".
               | 
               | To that point, btw, I'd linked to your other reply about
               | resets from a couple of mine:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39467039
               | 
               | * Note: And by "as implemented almost everywhere", I mean
               | so indistinguishable from everywhere that that
               | effectively boils down to "SMS is bad", much easier for
               | users and builders to understand, when better options are
               | available.
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | It mostly doesn't make sense, unless used exclusively as
           | second factor, never only factor.
           | 
           | - phone verification: OK, but this wasn't about that, and
           | having to have phone numbers in a database means you're
           | maintaining PII, which is a liability, see regulator-related
           | story below.
           | 
           | - mobile login (think dating apps): should be passkey, sign
           | in with Google/Apple, or oauth of users' choice, see Twitter
           | story below
           | 
           | - two factor where other factors are not available: in the
           | case of SMS this actually means for two ways to get into the
           | account, not two factor, see IsSMS2faSecure slides below.
           | 
           | SMS is an anti-pattern, generally less secure than a _good_
           | password (something you don 't even need to know w/ passkey)
           | and biometrics (something you have/are) as it opens your
           | threat model up to anyone with social engineering skills to
           | take over your account (something anyone can do).
           | 
           | This was demonstrated dramatically a few years back by a
           | research team calling the phone companies and being 100%
           | successful on major carriers.
           | 
           | The slides here are eye opening if you're thinking SMS is a
           | good idea:
           | 
           | https://www.issms2fasecure.com
           | 
           | https://www.usenix.org/system/files/soups2020-paper16-slides.
           | ..
           | 
           | We have the $400M FTX sim swap and this year the SEC's sim
           | swap to remind us nobody is immune when SMS is at play, and
           | people can't claim to not know about it since it's now widely
           | covered:
           | 
           |  _The FTX case highlights a growing awareness among
           | prosecutors and regulators of the ease and prevalence of SIM
           | swap schemes. Reading the Powell indictment is not unlike
           | reading one of the hundreds of credit card theft indictments
           | that federal and state prosecutors pursue each year. As far
           | as frauds go, SIM swapping is low-cost, unsophisticated, and
           | rote. But, if you're a criminal, it works._
           | 
           |  _SIM swapping works largely as the result of vulnerabilities
           | in the telecom's anti-fraud and identification protocols, and
           | as the result of relatively weak anti-fraud and
           | identification verification procedures used as the default
           | for all too many online service providers, including
           | financial services firms._
           | 
           | https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-
           | magazine/2024/02/12/the-f...
           | 
           | https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-blames-sim-swap-attack-
           | fo...
           | 
           | https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/feb/19/sim-swap-
           | how-y...
           | 
           | It keeps getting worse:
           | 
           |  _" US insurance firms sound alarm after 66,000 individuals
           | impacted by SIM swap attack"_
           | 
           | https://www.bitdefender.com/blog/hotforsecurity/us-
           | insurance...
           | 
           | Bottom line, and putting this "global user" story to bed, if
           | Twitter can dump SMS across emerging markets (not a lot of
           | blue checkmark subscribers), so can everyone:
           | 
           | https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/23/x-adds-support-for-
           | passkey...
           | 
           | All that said, @andix is correct in that if you're going to
           | use it, you must _not_ allow password resets or account
           | takeovers with SMS. SMS must be strictly _second_ factor,
           | never  " _only_ factor ":
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39467039
        
             | bonton89 wrote:
             | SMS 2FA is only ostensibly about security. Mobile providers
             | always sucked at it and never advertising that they were
             | selling high quality identification services in the first
             | place. They've actually gotten better at it but it wasn't
             | ever there thing and still isn't.
             | 
             | Phone numbers are excellent PII for user tracking though
             | AND allow companies to dump a lot of the hard support work
             | on some one else. Gobbling up PII to sell and externalizing
             | the hard support stuff to some one else is how tech
             | companies and increasingly any company works these days. So
             | it isn't a surprise it isn't going anywhere. You'll likely
             | need to cough up a number at least for "verification"
             | anyway (since they want it) so they'll probably just use
             | that for account recovery to while they're at it to make
             | their lives easier.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | Yes, but if you want large enterprise customers such as
         | regulated financial institutions where lots of money's at
         | stake, you will need to support SMS as a second factor,
         | mothers' maiden names, and bypassing all that when the user has
         | forgotten.
        
           | andix wrote:
           | Interesting, in the European Union SMS token are mostly
           | illegal for financial services, because they are not
           | considered safe enough.
        
             | TheNewsIsHere wrote:
             | It would be lovely to have that in the U.S., but I doubt it
             | will go anywhere anytime soon.
             | 
             | I'm sympathetic to the reasons. The U.S. has a massive
             | population of people who for various reasons will not or
             | cannot adopt methods other than SMS, if that.
             | 
             | Meanwhile you can call up some of our largest financial
             | institutions and impersonate someone with public-record
             | knowledge. Many organizations will allow you to skip any
             | kind of over-the-phone SMS challenge by asking for -more-
             | publicly available knowledge to "better"/further
             | authenticate the caller. And of course all our Social
             | Security Numbers are effectively all out there, and those
             | are still the de-factor identifier where a phone number is
             | not.
             | 
             | I used to do business with Vanguard. Several years ago they
             | rolled out U2F-then-WebAuthn support so you could use a
             | Yubikey or other FIDO2 compliant token as your MFA method.
             | They allowed you to disable SMS MFA if you did that. I
             | happily enabled that. Within two years, they re-introduced
             | a requirement to enroll a number for SMS MFA on the grounds
             | that their mobile app only supported codes delivered by
             | SMS, and there was no opt-out. If you didn't enroll a
             | number you'd be locked out and have to call customer
             | service to add a number and reset your password.
        
               | andix wrote:
               | Still funny to hear that everyone in the US has a social
               | security number, although there is no public healthcare
               | for everybody. And I always thought it's the land of
               | unlimited freedom, doesn't seem to apply to privacy.
               | 
               | I have a social security number too, but I need it to get
               | free (actually less expensive) healthcare. Not for
               | opening a bank account. I think in my country nobody
               | except health care is allowed to process social security
               | numbers, because it's considered private information.
               | They are not allowed to store them. If they get them by
               | accident they need to delete them ;)
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | That's either recent or wrong, I'm in the UK and certainly
             | they're not new since 2019 or whenever we left (I was going
             | to say 16 but I realised that was the vote not actual exit,
             | but longer than that anyway).
        
               | andix wrote:
               | I think the last extended deadline of PSD2 was end of
               | 2020, so after Brexit.
               | 
               | And it's not unheard of, that some countries just ignore
               | EU regulations. Especially if they are going to exit the
               | EU before they can be fined ;)
        
         | mooreds wrote:
         | SMS has problems, it's true. But every MFA method for consumers
         | has issues, and for some applications it is a viable solution.
         | 
         | I wrote more about that here:
         | https://ciamweekly.substack.com/p/ciam-mfa
        
           | achandlerwhite wrote:
           | I think it's biggest problem is when used for account
           | recovery and password reset, not login 2nd factor.
        
         | lucideer wrote:
         | > _I thought it was well-established that SMS text messages
         | should not be used for authentication purposes?_
         | 
         | Using SMS text messages for 2FA is barely better than 1FA, but
         | it _is_ better.
         | 
         | There's a lot of value in discouraging what many see as the
         | easy option, especially when the alternatives are getting users
         | to install extra apps (or even buy hardware keys of some sort),
         | so the scaremongering around SMS is warranted, but it's still
         | absolutely better than nothing.
        
         | andix wrote:
         | It depends. Using SMS as a second (!) factor is fine. There are
         | better options, but SMS is much better than no second factor at
         | all.
         | 
         | What you absolutely shouldn't do is allowing password reset
         | only via SMS token, because it's often not that hard to get
         | access to SMS codes via social engineering (convincing a store
         | clerk to issue a new SIM card, or stealing a phone and getting
         | the code displayed on the lock screen)
         | 
         | Having SMS as second factor requires the attacker to know the
         | password AND do some social engineering. It's a significant
         | security improvement over password only.
         | 
         | SMS might even be safer than password less passkey login, if
         | the user's passkey implementation is unsafe. It's possible to
         | store passkeys in password managers, and people regularly
         | manage to get their vaults compromised. This might only require
         | a keylogger on a PC where the user logs in to the password
         | manager.
        
           | achandlerwhite wrote:
           | This. I wish this distinction was recognized more.
        
             | andix wrote:
             | Sadly people are like sheep. They hear SMS and shout
             | unsafe.
        
       | Rodeoclash wrote:
       | This is a massive release, well done! I run Kratos and Oathkeeper
       | self hosted on ECS for our onboarding app (Xero only in Australia
       | for now I'm afraid, xonboard.com.au). Works like a dream for the
       | most part.
       | 
       | One thing which was very painful was adapting the custom UI. I
       | started with an existing example project and adapted it but it
       | was a confusing mix of server code and CSS in JS which made it
       | very difficult to "get at" some of the HTML / CSS.
       | 
       | Any movement on that front with the project?
        
         | arekkas wrote:
         | Our roadmap for this year has a revamped Ory Elements v2, which
         | will make this a lot less painful!
        
         | doctorpangloss wrote:
         | > One thing which was very painful was adapting the custom UI.
         | I started with an existing example project and adapted it but
         | it was a confusing mix of server code and CSS in JS which made
         | it very difficult to "get at" some of the HTML / CSS.
         | 
         | I cannot wrap my mind around why the vendors don't separate the
         | UI and backend application; and then in the UI project, author
         | it in something ubiquitous like React.
        
       | PlutoIsAPlanet wrote:
       | Is this comparable to Authentik?
        
       | rad_gruchalski wrote:
       | It's not really an alternative to Auth0. It's certainly a
       | component of an alternative to Auth0.
        
         | yladiz wrote:
         | This isn't very substantive, can you go into more detail about
         | what's missing?
        
           | vinckr wrote:
           | Ory Kratos is an identity management solution with MFA,
           | passwordless, WebAuthn and so on, so I would argue for most
           | use cases it alone is comparable.
           | 
           | But there are two more Ory services; one for permissions /
           | authZ and an OAuth2 server. You can make use of those to
           | cover the full range of authN/authZ use cases.
        
       | v3ss0n wrote:
       | Ory Kratos is so complicated .Authentik is much simpler and
       | easier.
        
         | arekkas wrote:
         | We have worked quite a lot on making Ory Kratos easier to
         | consume. In the release notes you find ~4 CLI commands you can
         | use to get a fully working Ory Kratos up and running, with all
         | UIs and configuration management :) You should give it another
         | try!
        
           | v3ss0n wrote:
           | I will give a try. Back in 2023 it's very complicated to
           | build own web application backend and frontend with it so we
           | ended up choosing Authentik.
        
       | aidos wrote:
       | Seems like a good place to ask: Does anyone have advice on good
       | solutions for B2B SAAS apps?
       | 
       | Just our app that needs logging in to and would like to allow the
       | usual things (password, social etc) but also allow customising
       | the rules per email domain.
       | 
       | For example, if someone enters someone@example.com in to the
       | login form they'll be shuffled off to this Azure connection for
       | authentication. Or maybe they use our login pages, but MFA is
       | enforced.
       | 
       | Things that I've tried (eg Authentik and FusionAuth) weren't well
       | suited for per organisation controls.
        
         | arekkas wrote:
         | We have this feature and it is called B2B SSO:
         | https://www.ory.sh/docs/kratos/organizations
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | Interesting. Any more details available on what's
           | configurable? How does it work out pricing wise?
        
             | arekkas wrote:
             | The flow is essentially what you see in the small video on
             | the docs page and can be set up in the Ory Network Console
             | with a few clicks. I agree though that the docs here are a
             | bit thin.
             | 
             | Pricing wise this is available on the Scale tier currently
             | dubbed as "Enterprise SSO" although "B2B Organizations"
             | probably would be more correct: https://www.ory.sh/pricing/
             | 
             | There are no limits to how many organizations you can have.
             | 
             | Regarding MFA - the MFA enforcement typically is the
             | responsibility of the IDP the company owns. So for example
             | dean@companyA.com use Okta and they enforce 2FA for their
             | users. anna@companyB.com use OneLogin and they do not
             | enforce MFA.
        
               | aidos wrote:
               | Thanks.
               | 
               | In terms of other enforcement, I meant more wrt to an
               | organisation that _didn't_ use another IDP but still
               | wanted to apply PW policies (for example) on their
               | domain.
               | 
               | Could you create an Ory project (sorry, don't know all
               | your terminology) to forward on to?
               | 
               | Something like:
               | 
               | Our app -> Ory -> split by domain -> Ory for specific
               | domain -> Policies.
        
               | lmeyerov wrote:
               | So not OSS?
        
         | mooreds wrote:
         | Hmm. (I work for FusionAuth, thanks for giving us a try!)
         | 
         | So you want a screen in front of the login process where
         | someone enters their email address, and then a second screen
         | where a variety of login options are presented?
         | 
         | Along with the ability to enforce MFA on a per domain basis?
         | 
         | Anything else you are looking to customize at the domain level,
         | such as password rules or registration ability?
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | For the moment our needs are actually fairly light. I'm
           | trying to remember exactly what I ran into with FusionAuth
           | but struggling a little unfortunately.
        
             | mooreds wrote:
             | Gotcha. We definitely don't have fine granularity around
             | when MFA is required (open issue here:
             | https://github.com/FusionAuth/fusionauth-issues/issues/2285
             | ).
             | 
             | Other than that I'd suggest putting a page in front of our
             | login pages with the domain logic, and modeling each set of
             | emails as either an application, organization or tenant,
             | depending on the specific features you need.
             | 
             | Either way, hope you find the right solution for your
             | needs!
        
               | aidos wrote:
               | Thanks. I appreciate the info. Will give it a shot when I
               | revisit this in a month or so.
        
         | mffap wrote:
         | Have a look at ZITADEL (https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel or
         | https://zitadel.com/), I think that does what you want. You can
         | create multiple tenants (called Organizations) and you can
         | setup security / login rules per organization such as enforcing
         | MFA. Furthermore you can configure on each tenant a separate
         | SSO and users are directly forwarded to their identity
         | provider. When you first enter your username (could be an
         | email) on the login screen, the policies of the user's
         | organization will be applied. That allows you to route users
         | based on their email domain etc. One additional thing to
         | mention is that ZITADEL does not only handle authentication,
         | but also authorization with self-service. Managers of an
         | organization can, for example, assign users of their
         | organization roles.
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | That sounds like just what I want.
           | 
           | ZITADEL was already on my list to try in the next round.
           | 
           | Can you clarify the pricing / plan required for that feature
           | set?
        
             | andix wrote:
             | Hmm, maybe take a look at their website?
             | https://zitadel.com/pricing
        
             | mffap wrote:
             | All of these features are included. Main drivers for
             | pricing in this case, I assume will be daily active users
             | (sum over the month) and how many third-party identity
             | providers you have configured. Unlimited tenants, users,
             | permissions etc. are included. We use DAU instead of MAU,
             | since there are many different use cases and that seems
             | work quite well. Just take the MAU and multiply by how many
             | times per month your users will sign-in. In the enterprise
             | tier we offer more custom quotes for higher volumes,
             | guarantee requirements, and support SLAs.
        
               | aidos wrote:
               | And to clarify on the third party providers. Assuming
               | every org is using Azure - that's 1 provider per org. So
               | 53 orgs would be an extra $1,000 / month?
        
         | grinich wrote:
         | Have you tried WorkOS? It's built for exactly this, with native
         | support for SAML and SCIM.
         | 
         | https://workos.com/
         | 
         | I'm the founder. Would love to hear your feedback and happy to
         | answer questions.
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | No, I haven't tried it. It looks great but unfortunately the
           | per connection pricing makes it not ideal for us. (We've had
           | a couple of messages back and forth on here in the past about
           | it). Most of our customers have low numbers of users, so the
           | per subscription cost becomes a bit high.
           | 
           | I'll kick the tyres in my next round of investigation though
           | to see how it looks.
        
             | esafak wrote:
             | What's on your shortlist?
        
         | BeryJu wrote:
         | Hey, for authentik this is actually something we're actively
         | working on: https://github.com/goauthentik/authentik/pull/8330,
         | and this will be included in our next feature release in April!
         | 
         | (Disclaimer, I am founder and CTO of authentik)
        
         | mcstempel wrote:
         | We built Stytch's B2B SaaS solution with this specific
         | shortcoming in mind -- most other solutions aren't actually
         | built with an organization-first data model (they're user-first
         | like Auth0 but support the general concept of orgs), which
         | makes it difficult to offer those per organization controls in
         | an ergonomic manner.
         | 
         | There's some more info on our multi-tenancy data model here
         | (https://stytch.com/docs/b2b/guides/multi-tenancy), and here's
         | the PUT request you'd use to manage any of those org
         | configurations: https://stytch.com/docs/b2b/api/update-
         | organization
        
         | esafak wrote:
         | Most of the commercial solutions break financially when you
         | have a freemium tier; orgs that don't pay below a certain size
         | or usage. Yet the auth provider charges you the same fee for
         | each such org.
        
       | notorandit wrote:
       | SMS? Really?
        
       | buro9 wrote:
       | passwordless via email is the single thing that I've been waiting
       | for, once I integrate this I can disable Auth0 and still support
       | the OSS SaaS forum platform -- this previously required an Auth0
       | account, and has sent Auth0 at least 10 medium sized customers.
        
       | fuomag9 wrote:
       | Unfortunately this is not comparable to authentik for me, it
       | looks like it's only for applications you're developing and not
       | already implemented solutions
        
         | mooreds wrote:
         | What do you mean? I think it supports oidc endpoints?
         | https://www.ory.sh/docs/oauth2-oidc/authorization-code-flow
         | indicates this.
        
       | mooreds wrote:
       | Congratulations, this is a big release. Some great features in
       | there. Love the phone number as a first class citizen, something
       | we've been considering for a while.
       | 
       | (I work for a competitor, FusionAuth.)
       | 
       | I noticed account linking, between social accounts and existing
       | accounts, based on email matching, was a new feature.
       | 
       | It's documented here: https://www.ory.sh/docs/kratos/social-
       | signin/link-multiple-p... I believe.
       | 
       | The document walks through the "linking an existing account with
       | a password to social account" scenario. I was wondering if there
       | was also the ability to go the other way, from an existing social
       | account to adding a password?
       | 
       | How do you handle the case where Alice signs up with a username
       | of alice@example.com but later wants to link alice@gmail.com?
       | 
       | I also wonder if you can block account linking on a per user
       | basis or if it is enabled for everyone in a system.
       | 
       | We've had account linking for a few years (documentation here:
       | https://fusionauth.io/docs/lifecycle/authenticate-users/iden... )
       | and have had customers bring up some edge cases like this.
        
         | Sytten wrote:
         | My experience is that in general edge cases are not kratos
         | strong suit. Works very well for the base case but anything
         | fancy you are generally on your own. But I don't mind since it
         | is OSS and someone can contribute/fork if they it.
        
           | esafak wrote:
           | What edge cases did you run into?
        
         | arekkas wrote:
         | We do have all edge cases brought to us solved in terms of
         | account linking and the recent changes further improve the user
         | experience in these scenarios. There are many credential types
         | around these days from passkeys to OTP codes to passwords and
         | OIDC. The biggest challenge is always ensuring the flows are
         | secure which is the hardest part in our view.
         | 
         | ps: I find it a tad frustrating that on every Ory post
         | FusionAuth is shilling in the comments, even if the comment is
         | tangential but clearly intended (through links and name
         | dropping) to draw attention away. It would be much better if
         | FusionAuth focused on releasing open source themselves and
         | truly contributed back to the security community instead.
        
           | mooreds wrote:
           | That's great you covered all the use cases you've seen. I'm
           | sure you'll continue to build out this useful functionality.
           | Agree that making sure the flows are secure is critical.
           | 
           | > ps: I find it a tad frustrating that on every Ory post
           | FusionAuth is shilling in the comments, even if the comment
           | is tangential but clearly intended (through links and name
           | dropping) to draw attention away.
           | 
           | Hmmm. Appreciate the feedback. I try to avoid shilling, be
           | upfront about my employment, and add useful comments to any
           | auth related posts on HN, not just those about Ory.
           | 
           | I have a lot of respect for what Ory has built (for example,
           | I featured your post about multi-region CIAM in my CIAM
           | newsletter: https://ciamweekly.substack.com/p/multi-region-
           | ciam ), but I will bring my own perspective to my comments,
           | and that is definitely colored by my experience at FusionAuth
           | as well as the fact they employ me.
        
           | fsociety wrote:
           | Glad I am not the only one who noticed, and not just Ory
           | posts. Once in a while, the leading question and last
           | paragraph of how "my product X solves this" is okay.
           | Sometimes even informative. But too often and bleh it is like
           | spam.
        
       | mariusor wrote:
       | I always wanted to use Kratos for my own open-source projects,
       | but I never got far enough into the researching how support for
       | adding different storage options is.
       | 
       | My project supports multiple storage back-ends (mostly around
       | document storage) and I would like to get Kratos to query the
       | same ones, even if it requires dev work on my side to add
       | support.
        
       | Sytten wrote:
       | Been using it in production for a bit less than 2y now. It has
       | improved a lot, the configuration is still kinda hard (jsonnet is
       | really ugly IMO) and there are a lot of weird decisions (like you
       | can change the password without knowing the current password if
       | you have login within the last X minutes even coming from a
       | social provider) but overall it is a solid contender in the space
       | now.
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | Note that this software unethically phones home with your usage
       | data without your consent. Such opt-out, on-by-default spyware
       | exfiltrates your data silently. They claim it's anonymous, but
       | that's false as it includes your client IP address, which
       | frequently maps directly to physical location.
       | 
       | You have to patch it out, because even if you try to turn it off,
       | it still phones home in violation of your expressed wishes:
       | 
       | https://www.ory.sh/docs/ecosystem/sqa
       | 
       | > _Disabling telemetry doesn 't have any downsides, except for us
       | not being able to improve the project. Note that Ory always sends
       | minimal ping with version information once on start up._
       | 
       | Why do people feel entitled to spy on users of the software they
       | _gave away_? I would never, ever even consider using their SaaS,
       | or that of any other company these founders ever run.
       | 
       | https://github.com/ory/x/blame/master/metricsx/metrics.go
       | 
       | Kevin Goslar, formerly of Google (per his GitHub profile), is the
       | one that committed this code (per the history publicly available
       | on GitHub). It is somewhat unsurprising that free software at his
       | new startup follows the same ethical framework regarding
       | nonconsensual surveillance as the world's largest advertising
       | surveillance company where he used to work.
       | 
       | The trend of open source spyware is increasing. We need to be
       | more vigilant both about the presence of spyware in open source
       | software, as well as being mindful of the people who engage in
       | such unethical practices. (For instance, Mattermost is another
       | offender in this category.)
        
         | vinckr wrote:
         | If you look in the source code for this software which is
         | provided for everyone to see you will realize that Kevin Goslar
         | is entirely innocent of this heinous crime. He merely added the
         | copyright headers to each file.
         | 
         | You misunderstand the purpose of the SQA telemetry.
         | 
         | There are some reasons for SQA telemetry listed in the doc you
         | posted: - Be able to say how many production deployments exist.
         | - Understand which features are used and how. - Understand how
         | much throughput deployments handle. - Evaluate how frequently
         | specific features are used. - Detect issues introduced by new
         | features (such as a buggy releases). - Identify problems at
         | scale (such as slow endpoints). - Understand which versions are
         | deployed.
         | 
         | If you have concerns about privacy as you rightly noted you can
         | turn it off with a simple flag (--sqa-opt-out) and if you don't
         | like the version ping you can block in your network. Hundreds
         | of users are running Ory Kratos without any telemetry sent
         | without any extra work.
         | 
         | So if this is a plot to produce open source spyware it's not
         | the best.
        
           | lmeyerov wrote:
           | This practice being considered acceptable has been a
           | nightmare - we had OSS libraries add spying later, change
           | their APIs for disabling it, etc. When it's a nested
           | dependency, even worse.
           | 
           | Now and then we run our stack with mitm monitor just to sniff
           | out this dangerous crap. More recently, we are seeing it in
           | ML libraries. For a security vendor to do it is extra bad
           | because they can't claim not understanding why it's bad and
           | often illegal.
        
         | rstat1 wrote:
         | If this is indeed "spyware" (which it isn't) they sure do a
         | poor job of hiding it from you.
         | 
         | Going so far as to tell you exactly what sort of harmless data
         | they're collecting and even putting the code for doing so in a
         | public repo, and then even letting you opt out of it.
         | 
         | Doesn't sound like any kind of spyware I've ever seen.
        
       | jillesvangurp wrote:
       | https://securityboulevard.com/2021/12/why-using-sms-authenti...
       | 
       | SMS is an anti feature at this point. This just moves the
       | problem. Arguably email is actually better than SMS and that's
       | not saying much. It's the difference between getting stabbed and
       | shot.
       | 
       | What's the most common thing that people have stolen: wallets and
       | phones. Lots of people have cheap phones, pre-paid sims, or
       | worse. Tying your identity to some phone number that should be
       | treated as temporary only to get locked out of your account some
       | years later is just not great.
       | 
       | Here's a list of reasons people change phone numbers:
       | 
       | - they have a prepaid number and they switch to a different
       | provider
       | 
       | - they travel and use a different sim while traveling
       | 
       | - they change job and lose access to their employer provided
       | phone
       | 
       | - they change operator and the operator declines to take over the
       | old number (happened to me in Germany)
       | 
       | - their phone number ends up on some list of scammers and to get
       | out of the non stop spam by simply getting another number
        
         | manishsharan wrote:
         | I discovered another reason to avoid SMS OTP: I am currently
         | visiting India and I have put my phone in Airplane mode because
         | my Canadian phone company , Rogers,charges $15 per day for
         | roaming and it is simply cheaper to buy an Indian SIM card and
         | use it on an old phone to act as a wifi hotspot for my actual
         | phone. So while my phone is in Airplane mode, I am unable to
         | use my RBC Visa or MasterCard for any online purchases in India
         | as there is no way for me to get the SMS OTP without paying
         | Rogers the CA$15 .
        
           | wbkang wrote:
           | SMS OTP sucks but this isn't it. Receiving text abroad is
           | free with almost all carriers including Rogers.
        
           | jhugo wrote:
           | Surely you can just turn off data roaming...
        
           | softveda wrote:
           | That is very high. Australian providers offer free incoming
           | SMS even when roaming internationally. The charge is only for
           | data which you can disable. Vodafone Australia has $5/day
           | roaming.
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | If my SMS is compromised, it's one thousand times easier to
         | shut it down and recover than if my email is compromised.
         | 
         | ^ Right?
        
       | moi2388 wrote:
       | Magic links to email and sms, which are unencrypted, for signup
       | and login, account linking and then converting the session
       | cookies to valid jwt?
       | 
       | I smell a CVE within a year.
        
       | js4ever wrote:
       | Ory Kratos is using 7 docker containers to run, seems super heavy
       | compare to Keycloak that will run with just 2 containers. What is
       | justifying the bloat?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-22 23:01 UTC)