• [LINK] Pegasus Mail & OAUTH2

    From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to All on Tue May 31 09:14:23 2022
    Forget the elephants - there's a donkey in the room!
    by David Harris, May 2nd 2022
    - https://www.pmail.com/devnews.htm

    "According to the old joke, a camel is just a horse that was
    designed by a committee: when it came to OAUTH2, though, what the
    committee produced was more like a two-wheeled donkey.

    OAUTH2 is a suite of documents that defines an authentication and
    authorization process - a set of rules and procedures that allows a
    user to control how a program can login to a service (for instance,
    to send mail), and what it can do while it is logged in. Many of
    its goals are entirely admirable:

    * Allows the user to specify narrow areas of information that
    programs can access - for example, users might grant a mail program
    access to just their mail, but not to other things like their
    calendar or browsing history. Using older password-based approaches
    essentially allowed any application knowing the password to access
    all the user's data, and potentially do anything it wanted with it.
    * Protects users from themselves by somewhat reducing their
    vulnerability when they use the same password on multiple sites,
    use weak passwords, or never change their passwords.
    * Theoretically allows a better "user experience" by doing the
    actual login to the site using the site's own login facility, which
    is presumably more familiar to the user than a mail program's
    generic one. [Note - I currently dispute this one, and will explain
    why later on].

    There are other more minor benefits that the developers of the
    framework make reference to, but these are the main ones the user
    will see. But you only get benefits from something like this if it
    is well-designed and implemented.

    Very annoyingly, sites like GMail and Microsoft's outlook.com site
    have taken to calling OAUTH2 "modern authentication", as if this
    somehow marks it as a well-thought-out, balanced mechanism:
    unfortunately, neither is true.

    OAUTH2 has had a very checkered history: originally a rather more
    complex framework called OAUTH 1, the process of developing OAUTH2
    was so internally fraught that the lead author of the specification
    resigned and removed his name from the process before it was
    released. If you'd like to see a little history of OAUTH2,
    Wikipedia has an article here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OAuth#OAuth_2.0

    So why am I so critical of OAUTH2? Let me count the ways...

    Before I start, though, I have to be clear up front about one
    thing: many of the goals of OAUTH2 are valid and worthwhile: my
    problems with it are exclusively to do with how it has been
    implemented. In my nearly thirty-five years of writing software in
    service of the Internet, OAUTH2 is the worst-conceived piece of
    software design I have ever encountered. More troublingly, it shows
    the increasing levels of control and power exercised by large,
    usually American corporations over the Internet, and the almost
    complete disregard they have for its historical openness and
    inclusiveness. OAUTH2 is a major step on the way to an Internet
    where the only players are large corporations, serving their own
    interests in the name of profit and power." ...

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Retrograde@21:1/5 to Computer Nerd Kev on Wed Jun 1 13:49:15 2022
    On 2022-05-30, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
    Forget the elephants - there's a donkey in the room!
    by David Harris, May 2nd 2022
    <snip>
    service of the Internet, OAUTH2 is the worst-conceived piece of
    software design I have ever encountered. More troublingly, it shows
    the increasing levels of control and power exercised by large,
    usually American corporations over the Internet, and the almost
    complete disregard they have for its historical openness and
    inclusiveness. OAUTH2 is a major step on the way to an Internet
    where the only players are large corporations, serving their own
    interests in the name of profit and power." ...

    Great article. I'd tolerate OAuth2 a bit if I could get CLI mail
    software like mutt to work with it at all. The criticism about this
    technology further placing formerly open systems squarely in the hands
    of profit-seeking companies is legitimate.

    We're already practically down to O365, gmail, and Apple Mail for most Americans - I hate it, as I also hate people telling me where to put my
    'gmail' on some form. Ain't got no gmail, pardner.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andy Burns@21:1/5 to Retrograde on Wed Jun 1 16:37:10 2022
    Retrograde wrote:

    I'd tolerate OAuth2 a bit if I could get CLI mail
    software like mutt to work with it

    There are mail proxy programs available that will do the oauth2 work for clients
    that can't handle it ...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Retrograde@21:1/5 to Andy Burns on Wed Jun 1 15:58:15 2022
    On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:37:10 +0100
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    Retrograde wrote:

    I'd tolerate OAuth2 a bit if I could get CLI mail
    software like mutt to work with it

    There are mail proxy programs available that will do the oauth2 work for clients
    that can't handle it ...

    Glad to hear it. Any recommendations? I'm looking around and the
    best-looking article seems to be behind a RedHat paywall. But to my
    surprise it also appears mutt 2.0.7 and up now has oath2 support - will
    have to try again.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andy Burns@21:1/5 to Retrograde on Wed Jun 1 21:32:09 2022
    Retrograde wrote:

    Andy Burns wrote:

    Retrograde wrote:

    I'd tolerate OAuth2 a bit if I could get CLI mail
    software like mutt to work with it

    There are mail proxy programs available that will do the oauth2 work for clients
    that can't handle it ...

    Glad to hear it. Any recommendations?

    Not a recommendation as such, just what I found when looking for other people

    <https://github.com/simonrob/email-oauth2-proxy>

    I'm looking around and the
    best-looking article seems to be behind a RedHat paywall. But to my
    surprise it also appears mutt 2.0.7 and up now has oath2 support - will
    have to try again.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to Retrograde on Thu Jun 2 09:35:04 2022
    Retrograde <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> wrote:
    On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:37:10 +0100
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
    Retrograde wrote:

    I'd tolerate OAuth2 a bit if I could get CLI mail
    software like mutt to work with it

    There are mail proxy programs available that will do the oauth2 work for clients
    that can't handle it ...

    Glad to hear it. Any recommendations? I'm looking around and the best-looking article seems to be behind a RedHat paywall. But to my
    surprise it also appears mutt 2.0.7 and up now has oath2 support - will
    have to try again.

    I've seen mention of GMail still allowing you to set up
    application-specific passwords for software that doesn't support
    OAUTH2, though of course it's "not recommended" and as such might
    not last forever either.

    I'm feeling quite smug about having personally avoided ever setting
    up a GMail account. GMail did recently stop delivering emails sent
    via my ISP's mail server though, without any "mail delivery failed"
    error of course, which caused me some pain. Though as always with
    Email it's never entirely clear whether they just started going
    into junk folders that the recipients never check. That's the
    trouble with avoiding GMail and other major email services, you
    avoid the Google enemy only for every idiot-user and their spam
    filter to become your new opponents.

    Another silent failure is with GMail blocking incoming emails with
    attachments of compressed files or some other binary data. It only
    happens sometimes, but it's a pain. Technically they do send an
    SMTP error back, but that only helps if you can see the mail
    server's error log.
    https://support.google.com/mail/?p=BlockedMessage

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)