On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 00:21 -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 1:23 AM Lars Wendler <polynomia...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > > Hi Alec, > > > > On Mon, 18 May 2020 18:42:24 -0700 Alec Warner wrote: > > > > > TL;DR: What if we launched id.gentoo.org, an identity provider that > > > provides authentication for Gentoo properties? Basically, 1 username / > > > password for wiki, bugs, email, forums, and any other http > > > service[0][1]. > > > > > > Today Gentoo has numerous systems that mostly work in a segmented way. > > > > > > - To connect to hosts, we use ssh keys. > > > - Git is authenticated via ssh keys. > > > - Email uses LDAP passwords. > > > - Bugzilla has its own identities, with their own passwords. > > > - Wiki is separate, with its own passwords. > > > - Forums are separate. > > > - Infra has an additional 4 systems that use separate credentials. > > > > > > Some applications support 2FA (such as wiki.) > > > Some applications do not support 2FA. > > > Applications that require 2FA have a configuration for each app, so you > > > have N configurations. > > > > > > If we configured id.gentoo.org you would have 1 identity across all > > > gentoo properties. > > > > > > Is this a thing people are interested in? > > > > > > [0] It's unlikely operations for git via ssh would change in this > > > rollout. [1] Its unclear if the scope is "gentoo developers" or "any > > > community member." The former have LDAP accounts and @gentoo.org email > > > addresses and so we can manage them easily; managing 1000s of other > > > accounts in the IDP remains to be seem. > > > > In case 2FA won't be mandatory I find this a good idea. > > > > 2FA is definitely a reason to deploy software like keycloak, but in the > first rollout I don't expect to enforce 2FA. Ideally we would deploy the > U2F support in keycloak and then, similar to our earlier program, offer > discounted or free u2f devices for Gentoo developers; this would likely be > on a 1-2 year timeframe. > > Is there some reason you don't want to use 2FA? >
I myself would find 2FA bothersome for low importance services. Whether it's U2F or OTP, I would generally find it silly to have to carry the hardware/software on me all the time or even use it when it's laying right next to me, say, just to approve a comment on a blog. But I guess if we go for SSO, it becomes a necessity to better protect our passwords. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
