mirror of
https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox.git
synced 2026-04-25 17:16:00 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #1416] Feature Request: OIDC oauth2 sign in / registration #3875
Labels
No labels
expected: maybe someday
expected: next release
expected: release after next
expected: unlikely unless contributed
good first ticket
help wanted
pull-request
scope: all users
scope: windows users
size: easy
size: hard
size: medium
size: medium
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: done
status: idea-phase
status: needs followup
status: wip
status: wontfix
touches: API/CLI/Spec
touches: configuration
touches: data/schema/architecture
touches: dependencies/packaging
touches: docs
touches: js
touches: views/replayers/html/css
why: correctness
why: functionality
why: performance
why: security
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/ArchiveBox#3875
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @Aeyk on GitHub (May 5, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox/issues/1416
What is the problem that your feature request solves
SSO/ability to sign in and up with a OIDC identity provider.
Describe the ideal specific solution you'd want, and whether it fits into any broader scope of changes
OIDC + scope mapping, where you can grant a user admin privileges if they have a matching key-value pair in the token
What hacks or alternative solutions have you tried to solve the problem?
None yet, but I am looking at putting it behind oauth2-proxy
How badly do you want this new feature?
It would be nice to have eventually
I like ArchiveBox and would be willing to contribute development time for this feature.
@pirate commented on GitHub (May 5, 2024):
I've wanted to add Django-allauth for a while, it would add support for tons of Oauth/oidc/social auth providers (and SAML).
I don't have time to do this myself currently as I'm focused on other priorities, but I welcome PRs!
@JKL213 commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024):
I'm also interested. Might do some experiments to implement OAuth on my own, mainly for Authentik support. Right now, my setup is less than ideal.
@pirate commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024):
For anyone who arrives here via Google, we have some docs on the authentication methods we currently support (LDAP, reverse proxy, etc.) and it provides a little bit of guidance on how to set up Authentik or oauth2-proxy as a bridge to link a SAML/OIDC provider to ArchiveBox:
https://github.com/ArchiveBox/ArchiveBox/wiki/Setting-up-Authentication#not-yet-supported-saml--oauth2--openid-authentication
(improvements to these docs are welcome from anyone who as done a setup like this themselves, changes can be suggested as PRs here)
The ideal final solution is to just integrate
django-allauthwith ArchiveBox natively though, then users wont need to run a bridge or IdP server on their own (PR's welcome, but please don't hand-write your own auth code, stick todjango-allauth).