[HN Gopher] Show HN: Stack, an open-source Clerk/Firebase Auth a...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Stack, an open-source Clerk/Firebase Auth alternative
Hey HN! Happy to finally launch Stack. We made it because we like
to put apps into production quickly, and authentication & user
management was taking up way too much time. We have components
like <SignIn /> and <AccountSettings /> that automatically adapt to
whatever theme & design system you're using. Check the blog post to
see the example with Radix UI and Joy UI. Also, there's an admin
dashboard for monitoring and editing accounts. Stack is 100%
AGPL/MIT-licensed, so you can self-host it. Cheers!
Author : n2d4
Score : 83 points
Date : 2024-04-14 14:00 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (stack-auth.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (stack-auth.com)
| alexchamberlain wrote:
| AGPL and MIT licenses are very (extremely?) different. What's the
| thinking there?
| n2d4 wrote:
| MIT for the client libraries, AGPL for the serverside
| officialchicken wrote:
| React/Next only
| tamimio wrote:
| Yeah, I was going to ask if it's react only, guess another
| product I won't bother with.
| pc86 wrote:
| My biggest issue with Clerk (aside from the since-validated
| suspicion their pricing would become downright predatory once
| they got sufficient adoption) was that if your product wasn't
| written in one of the SPA frameworks du jour it was basically
| unusable, unless you wanted your front-end integration
| driving your user data into your backend, which seemed like a
| security nightmare.
|
| Why so many products will call themselves enterprise with no
| .NET, Java, etc. integrations available is part of why the
| existing products in those ecosystems are so expensive.
|
| I look forward to playing around with Stack on my own and
| comparing it to Clerk but I couldn't seriously suggest this
| at work as there's no backend integrations.
| bsid wrote:
| Hey, (clerk founder) why do you think Clerk's pricing is
| predatory? Our goal is to continually lower prices and be
| as affordable as possible. Outside the free plan, it starts
| at $25 for the first 10k MAUs. Eventually we want auth to
| be as close to free as possible, while selling addt.
| services built on top of auth/users.
|
| Also, the clerk service has layered integrations, powered
| by an http layer. We have customers using each part of the
| layer for varied integration types. That being said, the
| SDKs for the spa frameworks are the easiest to use.
| dboreham wrote:
| Because nothing was already called "stack"?
| sergiotapia wrote:
| "I built a new programming language called `programming
| language`."
| patrickmay wrote:
| You'll have to increment the number:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL/I
| Cupprum wrote:
| Or even [1]. They also made dedicated keyboards for this
| one [2].
|
| [1]:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language)
| [2]: https://www.keyboardco.com/product-
| images/ibm_model_m_beige_...
| DotaFan wrote:
| Better then X.
| mkl wrote:
| I use this thing called STACK: https://stack-assessment.org/
|
| It's unsearchable.
| dang wrote:
| " _Please don 't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g.
| article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button
| breakage. They're too common to be interesting._"
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| seper8 wrote:
| Another product name impossible to find using google :D
|
| On a more useful note... I kind of wonder what the target
| audience for this is. Big companies? Dont want to roll their own
| auth. Startups? Dont want to roll their own auth...
| n2d4 wrote:
| Most people will probably use the hosted version and be fine
| with it. Most of the value in this being open-source is that it
| holds us accountable -- if we raised prices by 100x, you could
| just download a dump, fork the project and host it somewhere
| else (think of what happened with Redis recently). Another
| piece is that the community can vet its security. And of
| course, this lets everyone contribute to it.
|
| Between big companies and startups, we're definitely targetting
| startups. Big companies have a wide variety of auth systems to
| choose from (Auth0, Keycloak, etc.)
| WolfOliver wrote:
| What would be the benefit of using Stack compared to one of the
| existing OpenId Connect Providers like Auth0, Okta, Keycloak,
| Ory... ?
| roamerz wrote:
| Do you have federated LDAP anywhere on your roadmap? Are some
| features going to be Enterprise only eventually? We are currently
| evaluating Zitadel. How do you Stack(:D) up against them?
| prng2021 wrote:
| Can you summarize what differentiates this from Supabase and
| Supertokens?
| WolfOliver wrote:
| I like the docusaurus theme, you've build it yourself?
| zaishi wrote:
| It is very close to the default theme, here you can find the
| custom CSS
|
| https://github.com/stackframe-projects/stack/blob/main/docs/...
| Lucasoato wrote:
| Seems really cool! Good luck and have fun :) I see that you list
| 2FA and SSO in the roadmap for the next weeks, those are
| definitely needed for enterprise.
| spxneo wrote:
| Would love to see compatibility with existing Clerk integration!
| Then I could stop paying Clerk and pay you haha
|
| will it adapt to PrimeReact
| fayazara wrote:
| I was literally discussing why a service like clerk should be
| open source a few days ago. This is such perfect timing.
| johndevor wrote:
| Looks great. Would love a redwood integration!
| awinter-py wrote:
| feels like if keycloak had been slightly better 10 years ago,
| backend architecture would be way less complicated and more
| standardized
|
| auth system that worked well with static file buckets would cut
| like 40% of backend DB / server needs
| booi wrote:
| Auth is not a simple thing to do especially with the numerous
| accepted methods. Is there something that you think keycloak
| could do better?
| doctorpangloss wrote:
| Why don't more people contribute / coalesce around Keycloak?
|
| I don't know if it was even that "bad" per se "10 years ago."
| 10 years ago, React was only open source for 1 year. Meteor was
| Supabase. People were still writing CoffeeScript.
|
| You are lamenting the complexity of changing authorization
| requirements without changing application code. I don't know if
| OIDC was really set in stone back then. There was no Rego or
| Cedar, there were IAM policies, and that was also relatively
| new, and attributes-driven SAML. It's just a lot of development
| has happened.
| ohans wrote:
| > Despite how crucial it is, it's hard to find a service that has
| all the features you need for a successful product.
|
| > That's why we built Stack.
|
| I'm not convinced this is a strong USP. One could make a decent
| argument "Stack" doesn't have "all" the features (yet) - I've
| seen the roadmap.
|
| Firebase, Superbase etc. arguably have more features.
|
| In a nutshell, I think it might be better to have that paragraph
| really drive home the USP of the product e.g., open source
| accountability, fairer pricing model etc.
|
| Those are strong tells, instead of the "all the features"
| narrative. That's a hard battle to win :)
|
| Regardless, awesome work! And congrats on the launch
| n2d4 wrote:
| Appreciate the feedback! You're totally right, that paragraph
| is a bit of a mix of what we want it to be down the line (when
| it's feature-complete for enterprise) and what we have right
| now (which should be enough for startups, especially B2C, but
| not everyone).
|
| I've edited the paragraph a little to reflect that. Hopefully,
| at some point in the future we can really say "all the
| features" ;)
|
| In the end, you've recognized correctly that we see ourselves
| as an open-source company first and foremost.
| sneak wrote:
| Professional opinion: I think a user management system without
| 2FA on day 1 is a nonstarter. It is, to me, the same as if it
| didn't have a password field.
| zzzzzzzzzz10 wrote:
| What would be a standout feature compared to other open source
| authN/authZ solutions like Ory or Keycloak?
| alexashka wrote:
| Is this not a solved problem in the frontend/backend world? Are
| there not plug and play libraries for auth on the backend and
| frontend for every popular language?
| catapart wrote:
| This looks great! I was just looking in to Clerk as a solution
| for user management, so this is definitely a timely product, for
| me. And it looks to be a very easy integration because I could
| start out with the hosted version and then move to self hosting.
| I really like that feature!
|
| Unfortunately, my project is not using jsx, so I can't really
| implement anything that relies on it. I would love to check this
| out, if I can use it without Next.js or any kind of jsx
| compatability. But, until then, it's not something useful for any
| of my use cases.
| OccamsMirror wrote:
| Looks great! I've always felt the existing open source solutions
| are clunky and confusing.
|
| Any plans to create components for Flutter?
| jbk wrote:
| What I really want is the next step: the one where it manages
| user groups and roles. :)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-14 23:00 UTC)