Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login"

Re:Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login" by cdelsolar on Monday May 27, 2024 @01:10PM (#40492658)

I’ve been working in this industry for decades and this is the first time I made that connection…

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login" by foobazgt on Monday May 27, 2024 @01:47PM (#40492956)

I can second GP.

I have always heard and used authz and authn (pronounced auth-z and auth-n). Bare "auth" typically was used to mean both, but IAM was more clear for that in specific contexts. E.G. you might say someone "authed" to indicate both authentication and authorization, and you might have an IAM team that handles both authentication and authorization.

FWIW, I lead an IAM team.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login" by bostik on Monday May 27, 2024 @01:41PM (#40492920)

The distinction was already present in Apache2 configs in early 2000's, although there authentication was "auth", and "authorisation" was authz.

Real travesty came from OAuth. A system designed to handle authorisation was named after the term for authentication.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login" by recursive on Monday May 27, 2024 @02:36PM (#40493343)

But then it mostly ended up getting used for authentication anyway, so maybe it was ok.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instead of "auth", we should say "permissions" and "login" by mgkimsal on Monday May 27, 2024 @01:38PM (#40492896)

you're not alone.

[ Parent | on HN ]