Summary: Ref T13658.
Test Plan:
This is non-exhuastive.
- Poked around "Auth": edited a provider, toggled a provider.
Maniphest Tasks: T13658
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21778
Summary: Found a few typos which could be updated.
Test Plan:
I tested the Configuration page change by navigating to `/config` and verifying the page title set in the browser as well as the page title text on the page
|Before|After|
|---|---|
|{F9013208}|{F9013210}|
|{F9013300}|{F9013301}|
I verified the Conduit error message by navigating to `/auth/start/?__conduit__=1`
{F9013289}
The CircleCI error message was not verified due to the involvement of testing with CircleCI however the change is very minor and has very little risk of impacting any functionality.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21675
Summary:
Fixes T13433. Currently, "Login Screen Instructions" in "Auth" are shown only on the main login screen. If you enter a bad password or bad LDAP credential set and move to the flow-specific login failure screen (for example, "invalid password"), the instructions vanish.
Instead, persist them. There are reasonable cases where this is highly useful and the cases which spring to mind where this is possibly misleading are fairly easy to fix by making the instructions more specific.
Test Plan:
- Configured login instructions in "Auth".
- Viewed main login screen, saw instructions.
- Entered a bad username/password and a bad LDAP credential set, got kicked to workflow sub-pages and still saw instructions (previously: no instructions).
- Grepped for other callers to `buildProviderPageResponse()` to look for anything weird, came up empty.
Maniphest Tasks: T13433
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D20863
Summary: Ref T13250. See D20149. Mostly: clarify semantics. Partly: remove magic "null" behavior.
Test Plan: Poked around, but mostly just inspection since these are pretty much one-for-one.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Subscribers: yelirekim
Maniphest Tasks: T13250
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D20154
Summary:
Depends on D20099. Ref T13244. See PHI774. When password auth is enabled, we support a standard email-based account recovery mechanism with "Forgot password?".
When password auth is not enabled, we disable the self-serve version of this mechanism. You can still get email account login links via "Send Welcome Mail" or "bin/auth recover".
There's no real technical, product, or security reason not to let everyone do email login all the time. On the technical front, these links already work and are used in other contexts. On the product front, we just need to tweak a couple of strings.
On the security front, there's some argument that this mechanism provides more overall surface area for an attacker, but if we find that argument compelling we should probably provide a way to disable the self-serve pathway in all cases, rather than coupling it to which providers are enabled.
Also, inch toward having things iterate over configurations (saved database objects) instead of providers (abstract implementations) so we can some day live in a world where we support multiple configurations of the same provider type (T6703).
Test Plan:
- With password auth enabled, reset password.
- Without password auth enabled, did an email login recovery.
{F6184910}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13244
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D20100
Summary: Depends on D20096. Reverts D14057. This was added for Phacility use cases in D14057 but never used. It is obsoleted by {nav Auth > Customize Messages} for non-Phacility use cases.
Test Plan: Grepped for removed symbol.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D20099
Summary: See https://secure.phabricator.com/D18901#249481. Update the docs and a warning string to reflect the new reality that `bin/auth recover` is now able to recover any account, not just administrators.
Test Plan: Mk 1 eyeball
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D20007
Summary: Depends on D19992. Ref T13222. If administrators provide a custom login message, show it on the login screen.
Test Plan:
{F6137930}
- Viewed login screen with and without a custom message.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D19994
Summary: Cursory research indicates that "login" is a noun, referring to a form, and "log in" is a verb, referring to the action of logging in. I went though every instances of 'login' I could find and tried to clarify all this language. Also, we have "Phabricator" on the registration for like 4-5 times, which is a bit verbose, so I tried to simplify that language as well.
Test Plan: Tested logging in and logging out. Pages feel simpler.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18322
Summary:
Ref T11179. This splits "Edit Blocking Tasks" into two options now that we have more room ("Edit Parent Tasks", "Edit Subtasks").
This also renames "Blocking" tasks to "Subtasks", and "Blocked" tasks to "Parent" tasks. My goals here are:
- Make the relationship direction more clear: it's more clear which way is up with "parent" and "subtask" at a glance than with "blocking" and "blocked" or "dependent" and "dependency".
- Align language with "Create Subtask".
- To some small degree, use more flexible/general-purpose language, although I haven't seen any real confusion here.
Fixes T6815. I think I narrowed this down to two issues:
- Just throwing a bare exeception (we now return a dialog explicitly).
- Not killing open transactions when the cyclec check fails (we now kill them).
Test Plan:
- Edited parent tasks.
- Edited subtasks.
- Tried to introduce graph cycles, got a nice error dialog.
{F1697087}
{F1697088}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6815, T11179
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16166
Summary:
Ref T10785. Around the time we launched Phacility SAAS we implemented this weird autologin hack. It works fine, so clean it up, get rid of the `instanceof` stuff, and support it for any OAuth2 provider.
(We could conceivably support OAuth1 as well, but no one has expressed an interest in it and I don't think I have any OAuth1 providers configured correctly locally so it would take a little bit to set up and test.)
Test Plan:
- Configured OAuth2 adapters (Facebook) for auto-login.
- Saw no config option on other adapters (LDAP).
- Nuked all options but one, did autologin with Facebook and Phabricator.
- Logged out, got logout screen.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10785
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16060
Summary:
Ref T7303. Ref T7673. This implements an "auth.logout" which:
- terminates all web sessions;
- terminates the current OAuth token if called via OAuth; and
- may always be called via OAuth.
(Since it consumes an OAuth token, even a "malicious" OAuth application can't really be that much of a jerk with this: it can't continuously log you out, since calling the method once kills the token. The application would need to ask your permission again to get a fresh token.)
The primary goal here is to let Phacility instances call this against the Phacility upstream, so that when you log out of an instance it also logs you out of your Phacility account (possibly with a checkbox or something).
This also smooths over the session token code. Before this change, your sessions would get logged out but when you reloaded we'd tell you your session was invalid.
Instead, try to clear the invalid session before telling the user there's an issue. I think that ssentially 100% of invalid sessions are a result of something in this vein (e.g., forced logout via Settings) nowadays, since the session code is generally stable and sane and has been for a long time.
Test Plan:
- Called `auth.logout` via console, got a reasonable logout experience.
- Called `auth.logout` via OAuth.
- Tried to make another call, verified OAuth token had been invalidated.
- Verified web session had been invalidated.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T7303, T7673
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15594
Summary: [WIP] Tossing this up for safety and to read through it. Need to test, update some of the other flows. This updates everything in Auth for new UI and modern conventions.
Test Plan: Loooots of random testing, new providers, edit providers, logging out, forgot password... more coming.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15550
Summary:
Ref T10004. Currently, when a logged-out user visits an application like Maniphest, we show them a disabled "Create Task" button with no dropdown menu.
This is technically correct in some sense because none of the items in the menu will work, but we can be more helpful and show the items, just in a disabled state:
{F1028903}
When the user clicks these, they'll be pushed through the login flow and (after D14804) end up on the same page they were on when they selected the item. From here, they can proceed normally.
I changed "...to continue." to "...to take this action." to hopefully be a little more clear. In particular, we do not //continue// the action after you log in: you end up back on the same page you started on. For example, if you clicked "Create New Bug" from the list view, you end up back on the list view and need to click "Create New Bug" again. If you clicked "Edit Task" from some task detail page, you end up on the task detail page and have to click "Edit Task" again.
I think this behavior is always very good. I think it is often the best possible behavior: for actions like "Edit Blocking Tasks" and "Merge Duplicates In", the alternatives I can see are:
- Send user back to task page (best?)
- Send user to standalone page with weird dialog on it and no context (underlying problem behavior all of this is tackling, clearly not good)
- Send user back to task page, but with dialog open (very complicated, seems kind of confusing/undesirable?)
For actions like "Create New Bug" or "Edit Task", we have slightly better options:
- Send user back to task page (very good?)
- Send user to edit/create page (slightly better?)
However, we have no way to tell if a Workflow "makes sense" to complete in a standalone way. That is, we can't automatically determine which workflows are like "Edit Task" and which workflows are like "Merge Duplicates In".
Even within an action, this distinction is not straightforward. For example, "Create Task" can standalone from the Maniphest list view, but should not from a Workboard. "Edit Task" can standalone from the task detail page, but should not from an "Edit" pencil action on a list or a workboard.
Since the simpler behavior is easy, very good in all cases, often the best behavior, and never (I think?) confusing or misleading, I don't plan to puruse the "bring you back to the page, with the dialog open" behavior at any point. I'm theoretically open to discussion here if you REALLY want the dialogs to pop open magically but I think it's probably a lot of work.
Test Plan: As a logged out user, clicked "Create Task". Got a dropdown showing the options available to me if I log in. Clicked one, logged in, ended up in a reasonable place (the task list page where I'd started).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14806
Summary:
Ref T10004. After a user logs in, we send them to the "next" URI cookie if there is one, but currently don't always do a very good job of selecting a "next" URI, especially if they tried to do something with a dialog before being asked to log in.
In particular, if a logged-out user clicks an action like "Edit Blocking Tasks" on a Maniphest task, the default behavior is to send them to the standalone page for that dialog after they log in. This can be pretty confusing.
See T2691 and D6416 for earlier efforts here. At that time, we added a mechanism to //manually// override the default behavior, and fixed the most common links. This worked, but I'd like to fix the //default// beahvior so we don't need to remember to `setObjectURI()` correctly all over the place.
ApplicationEditor has also introduced new cases which are more difficult to get right. While we could get them right by using the override and being careful about things, this also motivates fixing the default behavior.
Finally, we have better tools for fixing the default behavior now than we did in 2013.
Instead of using manual overrides, have JS include an "X-Phabricator-Via" header in Ajax requests. This is basically like a referrer header, and will contain the page the user's browser is on.
In essentially every case, this should be a very good place (and often the best place) to send them after login. For all pages currently using `setObjectURI()`, it should produce the same behavior by default.
I'll remove the `setObjectURI()` mechanism in the next diff.
Test Plan: Clicked various workflow actions while logged out, saw "next" get set to a reasonable value, was redirected to a sensible, non-confusing page after login (the page with whatever button I clicked on it).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14804
Summary:
Ref T9346. This mostly allows us to give users additional advice based on which instance they are trying to log in to in the Phacility cluster.
It's also slightly more flexible than `auth.login-message` was, and maybe we'll add some more hooks here eventually.
This feels like it's a sidegrade in complexity rather than really an improvement, but not too terrible.
Test Plan:
- Wrote the custom handler in T9346 to replicate old config functionality.
- Wrote a smart handler for Phacility that can provide context-sensitive messages based on which OAuth client you're trying to use.
See new message box at top (implementation in next diff):
{F780375}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9346
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14057
Summary:
This translation string is wrong and causes the following warning when running unit tests:
```
[2015-06-15 16:03:41] ERROR 2: vsprintf(): Too few arguments at [/home/joshua/workspace/github.com/phacility/libphutil/src/internationalization/PhutilTranslator.php:95]
arcanist(head=master, ref.master=956bfa701c36), phabricator(head=master, ref.master=80f11427e576), phutil(head=master, ref.master=3ff84448a916)
#0 vsprintf(string, array) called at [<phutil>/src/internationalization/PhutilTranslator.php:95]
#1 PhutilTranslator::translate(string)
#2 call_user_func_array(array, array) called at [<phutil>/src/internationalization/pht.php:17]
#3 pht(string) called at [<phabricator>/src/applications/auth/controller/PhabricatorAuthStartController.php:75]
#4 PhabricatorAuthStartController::handleRequest(AphrontRequest) called at [<phabricator>/src/aphront/AphrontController.php:69]
#5 AphrontController::delegateToController(PhabricatorAuthStartController) called at [<phabricator>/src/applications/base/controller/PhabricatorController.php:213]
#6 PhabricatorController::willBeginExecution() called at [<phabricator>/src/applications/base/controller/__tests__/PhabricatorAccessControlTestCase.php:270]
#7 PhabricatorAccessControlTestCase::checkAccess(string, PhabricatorTestController, AphrontRequest, array, array) called at [<phabricator>/src/applications/base/controller/__tests__/PhabricatorAccessControlTestCase.php:112]
#8 PhabricatorAccessControlTestCase::testControllerAccessControls()
#9 call_user_func_array(array, array) called at [<arcanist>/src/unit/engine/phutil/PhutilTestCase.php:492]
#10 PhutilTestCase::run() called at [<arcanist>/src/unit/engine/PhutilUnitTestEngine.php:65]
#11 PhutilUnitTestEngine::run() called at [<arcanist>/src/workflow/ArcanistUnitWorkflow.php:186]
#12 ArcanistUnitWorkflow::run() called at [<arcanist>/scripts/arcanist.php:382]
```
Test Plan: `arc lint`
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers, chad
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, chad
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13292
Summary:
Ref T7152. This substantially completes the upstream login flow. Basically, we just cookie you and push you through normal registration, with slight changes:
- All providers allow registration if you have an invite.
- Most providers get minor text changes to say "Register" instead of "Login" or "Login or Register".
- The Username/Password provider changes to just a "choose a username" form.
- We show the user that they're accepting an invite, and who invited them.
Then on actual registration:
- Accepting an invite auto-verifies the address.
- Accepting an invite auto-approves the account.
- Your email is set to the invite email and locked.
- Invites get to reassign nonprimary, unverified addresses from other accounts.
But 98% of the code is the same.
Test Plan:
- Accepted an invite.
- Verified a new address on an existing account via invite.
- Followed a bad invite link.
- Tried to accept a verified invite.
- Reassigned an email by accepting an unverified, nonprimary invite on a new account.
- Verified that reassigns appear in the activity log.
{F291493}
{F291494}
{F291495}
{F291496}
{F291497}
{F291498}
{F291499}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7152
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11737
Summary: Ref T7153. I am not sure if this is 100% correct because sometimes you have to POST vs GET and I don't know if the redirect response will / can do the right thing? I think options to fix this would be to 1) restrict this functionality to JUST the Phabricator OAuth provider type or 2) something really fancy with an HTTP(S) future. The other rub right now is when you logout you get half auto-logged in again... Thoughts on that?
Test Plan: setup my local instance to JUST have phabricator oauth available to login. was presented with the dialog automagically...!
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7153
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11701
Summary:
Ref T6870. Since it does not make sense to redirect the user to the login form after they log in, we try not to set the login form as the `next` cookie.
However, the current check is hard-coded to `/auth/start/`, and the form can also be served at `/login/`. This has no real effect on normal users, but did make debugging T6870 confusing.
Instead of using a hard-coded path check, test if the controller was delegated to. If it was, store the URI. If it's handling the request without delegation, don't.
Test Plan:
- Visited login form at `/login/` and `/auth/start/`, saw it not set a next URI.
- Visited login form at `/settings/` (while logged out), saw it set a next URI.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley, lpriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6870
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11292
Summary: Ran `arc lint --apply-patches --everything` over rP, mainly to change double quotes to single quotes where appropriate. These changes also validate that the `ArcanistXHPASTLinter::LINT_DOUBLE_QUOTE` rule is working as expected.
Test Plan: Eyeballed it.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin, hach-que
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D9431
Summary:
Fixes T3471. Specific issues:
- Add the ability to set a temporary cookie (expires when the browser closes).
- We overwrote 'phcid' on every page load. This creates some issues with browser extensions. Instead, only write it if isn't set. To counterbalance this, make it temporary.
- Make the 'next_uri' cookie temporary.
- Make the 'phreg' cookie temporary.
- Fix an issue where deleted cookies would persist after 302 (?) in some cases (this is/was 100% for me locally).
Test Plan:
- Closed my browser, reopned it, verified temporary cookies were gone.
- Logged in, authed, linked, logged out.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T3471
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8537
Summary:
Fixes T3793. There's a lot of history here, see D4012, T2102. Basically, the problem is that things used to work like this:
- User is logged out and accesses `/xyz/`. After they login, we'd like to send them back to `/xyz/`, so we set a `next_uri` cookie.
- User's browser has a bunch of extensions and now makes a ton of requests for stuff that doesn't exist, like `humans.txt` and `apple-touch-icon.png`. We can't distinguish between these requests and normal requests in a general way, so we write `next_uri` cookies, overwriting the user's intent (`/xyz/`).
To fix this, we made the 404 page not set `next_uri`, in D4012. So if the browser requests `humans.txt`, we 404 with no cookie, and the `/xyz/` cookie is preserved. However, this is bad because an attacker can determine if objects exist and applications are installed, by visiting, e.g., `/T123` and seeing if they get a 404 page (resource really does not exist) or a login page (resource exists). We'd rather not leak this information.
The comment in the body text describes this in more detail.
This diff sort of tries to do the right thing most of the time: we write the cookie only if we haven't written it in the last 2 minutes. Generally, this should mean that the original request to `/xyz/` writes it, all the `humans.txt` requests don't write it, and things work like users expect. This may occasionally do the wrong thing, but it should be very rare, and we stop leaking information about applications and objects.
Test Plan: Logged out, clicked around / logged in, used Charles to verify that cookies were set in the expected way.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3793
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8047
Summary:
Ref T4339. Ref T4310. Currently, sessions look like `"afad85d675fda87a4fadd54"`, and are only issued for logged-in users. To support logged-out CSRF and (eventually) external user sessions, I made two small changes:
- First, sessions now have a "kind", which is indicated by a prefix, like `"A/ab987asdcas7dca"`. This mostly allows us to issue session queries more efficiently: we don't have to issue a query at all for anonymous sessions, and can join the correct table for user and external sessions and save a query. Generally, this gives us more debugging information and more opportunity to recover from issues in a user-friendly way, as with the "invalid session" error in this diff.
- Secondly, if you load a page and don't have a session, we give you an anonymous session. This is just a secret with no special significance.
This does not implement CSRF yet, but gives us a client secret we can use to implement it.
Test Plan:
- Logged in.
- Logged out.
- Browsed around.
- Logged in again.
- Went through link/register.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4310, T4339
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8043
Summary: Ref T4339. We have more magical cookie names than we should, move them all to a central location.
Test Plan: Registered, logged in, linked account, logged out. See inlines.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4339
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8041
Summary: We currently have a lot of calls to `addCrumb(id(new PhabricatorCrumbView())->...)` which can be expressed much more simply with a convenience method. Nearly all crumbs are only textual.
Test Plan:
- This was mostly automated, then I cleaned up a few unusual sites manually.
- Bunch of grep / randomly clicking around.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: hach-que, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7787
Summary:
^\s+(['"])dust\1\s*=>\s*true,?\s*$\n
Test Plan: Looked through the diff.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6769
Summary:
Ref T1536. Currently, when you install Phabricator you're dumped on the login screen and have to consult the documentation to learn about `bin/accountadmin`.
Instead, detect that an install is running first-time setup:
- It has no configured providers; and
- it has no user accounts.
We can safely deduce that such an install isn't configured yet, and let the user create an admin account from the web UI.
After they login, we raise a setup issue and lead them to configure authentication.
(This could probably use some UI and copy tweaks.)
Test Plan:
{F46738}
{F46739}
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6228
Summary:
Ref T1536. This is extremely reachable and changes the login code to the new stuff.
Notes:
- I've hard-disabled password registration since I want installs to explicitly flip it on via config if they want it. New installs will get it by default in the future, but old installs shouldn't have their auth options change.
- Google doesn't let us change the redirect URI, so keep the old one working.
- We need to keep a bit of LDAP around for now for LDAP import.
- **Facebook:** This causes substantive changes in what login code is executed.
Test Plan:
- Logged in / logged out / registered, hit new flows.
- Logged in with google.
- Verified no password registration by default.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: wez, nh, aran, mbishopim3
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6222
Summary: Ref T1536. This script basically exists to restore access if/when users shoot themselves in the foot by disabling all auth providers and can no longer log in.
Test Plan: {F46411}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6205
Summary:
Ref T1536. Facebook currently does a check which should be on-login in registration hooks, and this is generally a reasonable hook to provide.
The "will login" event allows listeners to reject or modify a login, or just log it or whatever.
NOTE: This doesn't cover non-web logins right now -- notably Conduit. That's presumably fine.
(This can't land for a while, it depends on about 10 uncommitted revisions.)
Test Plan: Logged out and in again.
Reviewers: wez, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6202
Summary:
Ref T1445. Ref T1536. Although we have separate CSRF protection and have never been vulnerable to OAuth hijacking, properly implementing the "state" parameter provides a little more certainty.
Before OAuth, we set a random value on the client, and pass its hash as the "state" parameter. Upon return, validate that (a) the user has a nonempty "phcid" cookie and (b) the OAuth endpoint passed back the correct state (the hash of that cookie).
Test Plan: Logged in with all OAuth providers, which all apparently support `state`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, arice
Maniphest Tasks: T1445, T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6179
Summary:
Ref T1536. None of this code is reachable.
Implements new-auth login (so you can actually login) and login validation (which checks that cookies were set correctly).
Test Plan: Manually enabled FB auth, went through the auth flow to login/logout. Manually hit most of the validation errors.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6162
Summary:
Ref T1536. Code is intentionally made unreachable (see PhabricatorAuthProviderOAuthFacebook->isEnabled()).
This adds:
- A provider-driven "start" screen (this has the list of ways you can login/register).
- Registration actually works.
- Facebook OAuth works.
@chad, do you have any design ideas on the start screen? I think we poked at it before, but the big issue was that there were a limitless number of providers. Today, we have:
- Password
- LDAP
- Facebook
- GitHub
- Phabricator
- Disqus
- Google
We plan to add:
- Asana
- An arbitrary number of additional instances of Phabricator
Users want to add:
- OpenID
- Custom providers
And I'd like to have these at some point:
- Stripe
- WePay
- Amazon
- Bitbucket
So basically any UI for this has to accommodate 300 zillion auth options. I don't think we need to solve any UX problems here (realistically, installs enable 1-2 auth options and users don't actually face an overwhelming number of choices) but making the login forms less ugly would be nice. No combination of prebuilt elements seems to look very good for this use case.
Test Plan: Registered a new acount with Facebook.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1536
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6161
