SO and SU just told me I've been logged in. I'm guessing because I'm already logged into my Google account... but how does SO know that?
migrated from stackoverflow.com Sep 11 '10 at 22:59
This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.
I'm going to provide more than just the technical details here, as I think there are alot of implicit assumptions about global login that aren't quite correct out there.
Accordingly, this is going to be really long.
1 is obvious, 2 is due to a strong desire not to introduce a new network wide dependency, 3 is shorthand for "don't scare off the user," and 4 is an acknowledgement of how much of our traffic is from anonymous users.
These are taken as axiomatic, any scheme that didn't fulfill all 4 was immediately discarded.
Visiting a New Site
Some Technical Details
We're in a pretty novel position, as we cannot trust the user despite acting on their behalf. Conceptually, we have two of our sites (some StackExchange site, and StackAuth) communicating using the user's browser as the channel and as a data store. Accordingly, everything that passes through the user's browser (which is everything, really) must be cryptographically secure.
Acknowledging this, we turned paranoia up to 11 and went full on "defense in depth*." If anything looks "weird" we bail, and the user degrades to using manual logins.
Things We Check
Third-Party Cookies, SSL, and More
With some song and dance you can get Chrome, Firefox, and IE to accept third party cookies (most of the time anyway). Safari requires that you set these cookies via an IFrame, and convince the user to interact with it; which is quite possibly the suckiest user experience you can come up with for a global login scheme. A browser as popular as Safari just plain not working with any third-party cookie scheme just kills the entire technology for us.
There have been some SSL questions. The short of it: we don't use SSL anywhere in global login. SSL protects against man in the middle attacks between the user's browser and a website. As noted above, we don't trust the user so SSL doesn't actually solve any of our security problems. Also, currently our normal user session cookies (
Inquiries have been made about open-sourcing our implementation of this scheme, or allowing third-parties to authenticate users with it. In short: no. This scheme makes very hard assumptions about how a site works, and thus isn't easily open source-able. For third-party authentication, I'd much rather use something more "standard" like OAuth2.0 (which isn't acceptable for us in network, since it assumes a many-to-one consumers-to-providers scheme).
*The idea is that an attacker has to jump through a lot of non-trivial hoops before they can even start to attack the actual cryptographic system.
|show 6 more comments|
They are using HTML 5 Local Storage. Jeff happened to publish a blog article just today, describing what happens behind the scenes: