Re:You shouldn't create your own authentication system
by stephenr on Sunday November 24, 2019 @02:09AM
(#21618917)
Your business model is part of why I think it’s bad advice: every third party service used is an operational liability. The less standardised the integration, the harder it is to swap to a competitor if required. The more standardised the integration, the easier it is.
To use your email argument earlier: if a company doesn’t want to handle its own mail servers (which is a common choice these days) the cost of moving between vendors can be pretty low. A few DNS records and some config/environment vars, and voila. It’s very possible to do it with zero downtime.
Re:You shouldn't create your own authentication system
by nguyenkims on Sunday November 24, 2019 @10:20AM
(#21620890)
I’m not sure to follow your points. The technology is based on oauth2/openid standard which would allow developers to switch quite easily.
The business model is subscription based which is pretty standard.
Sending email is not just about « clean » ip address or passing by a third party provider.For example some email clients can display the emails differently so one need to take this into account.
Anw I don’t think the discussion will lead to anything. Again the article represents a point of view that some will not agree and I totally understand.
I think we went too far from the initial point. Nevertheless the cost of such service is low enough that it can be maintained easily, even without a significant revenue number.
> It’s not normal to submit that as “news”.
It depends on the definition of news I guess. The article brings another point of view, though discutable. The promotion happens only at the end, in a reasonable way.
> Every language I know has an easy to use wrapper/functionality for strong password hashing.
Again the password hashing is just an aspect of an authentication system.