Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add reverse proxy based authentication #320

Open
JVT038 opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Add reverse proxy based authentication #320

JVT038 opened this issue Apr 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request priority: low Not important security
Milestone

Comments

@JVT038
Copy link
Collaborator

JVT038 commented Apr 18, 2023

This would mean that Movary would only be accessible from a reverse proxy (so not from http://192.168.2.1, but from https://movary.domain.com) and would read HTTP headers from a reverse proxy like NGINX or Traefik to authenticate a user.

This allows the use of things like Authelia, Keycloak or Authentik, which provide a wayyy better security / authentication flow than Movary does. And I honestly don't think Movary should provide a 100%, foolproof, fort knox-like security, because it would take too much time to do so, and that's probably out of the project's scope. It would be better to leave the really advanced security stuff to applications specifically designed for security stuff, like the projects I mentioned above.

@JVT038 JVT038 added the enhancement New feature or request label Apr 18, 2023
@leepeuker
Copy link
Owner

Hm, I am not against this in principal, adding this as an additional option is definitely fine by me and a great idea.
But I want the basic Movary setup to have as less external decencies as possible, to keep the infrastructure as simple as possible so that even beginners have no problem setting it up and we do not have to maintain too many integrations.

And I honestly don't think Movary should provide a 100%, foolproof, fort knox-like security, because it would take too much time to do so, and that's probably out of the project's scope

I agree, I even think it does not need high security for the most part, there is not really much valuable/dangerous data for bad actors to acquire (if used in a personal scope). That does of course not mean that security is not important and the basics should be implemented well. Providing options for people who want to be as safe as possible (like you suggested) is a great idea, but it is not the focus at the current stage, so I would see this as a low priority topic

@JVT038
Copy link
Collaborator Author

JVT038 commented Aug 15, 2023

We could use OpenID Connect or OAuth2 for this, as most of the external SSO software (such as Keycloak, Authelia, Authentik, Google, etc.) support both of them, and it's safer than proxying a header through Movary and hoping for the best...

@JVT038 JVT038 added this to the Version 2.0 milestone Oct 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request priority: low Not important security
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants