Just a bit more clarity of grouping! I'm also thinking about extracting
modeling APIs into a service file like this too, in which case I think
this would help clarify what it is.
Yay, we got the API endpoint for this! The `linkage` scope is the key.
Rather than pulling back the specific fallback behavior we had wrote
for usernames before, which was slightly different and involved
appending `neopass` in there too (e.g. `matchu-neopass-1234`), I
figured let's just use a lot of the same logic, and just use the
preferred name as the base name. (I figure the `neopass` suffix isn't
that useful anyway, `matchu-1234` kinda looks better tbh! And it's all
fallback stuff that I expect serious users to replace, anyway.)
Oh right, if you can remove your email, there's a way to fully lock out
your account:
1. Create account via NeoPass, so no password is set.
2. Ensure you have an email saved, then disconnect NeoPass.
3. Remove the email.
4. Now you have no NeoPass, no email, and no password!
In this change, we add a validation that requires an account to always
have at least one login method. This works well for the case described
above, and also helps offer server-side validation to the "can't
disconnect NeoPass until you have an email and password" stuff that
previously was only enforced by disabling the button.
That is, the following procedure could also lock you out before,
whereas now it raises the "Whoops, there was an error disconnecting
your NeoPass from your account, sorry." message:
1. Create account via NeoPass, so no password is set.
2. Ensure you have an email saved, so "Disconnect" button is enabled.
3. Open a new browser tab, and remove the email.
4. In the original browser tab, click "Disconnect".
Ah okay, if you leave the password field blank but don't have one set,
our simple `update` method gets annoyed that you left it blank.
In this change, we simplify the model API by just overriding
`update_with_password` with our own special behavior for the
no-password case.
including validation logic to make sure it's not already connected to
another one!
The `intent` param on the NeoPass form is part of the key! Thanks
OmniAuth for making it easy to pass that data through!
Ahh I see, if you do a no-op update, it still clears the
`previously_new_record?` state, so our NeoPass controller thinks this
account already existed. Instead, let's only do this update if it's an
account that already exists, instead of depending on the no-op-iness!
That is, you're required to add a password *or* an email before
disconnecting your NeoPass, but idk, I think it's rude to demand an
email from someone for the sake of *disconnection*. Email is no longer
required for accounts that already exist!
This is more consistent with the `uses_omniauth?` we already have, and
it also will help for the next change, where I want a `uses_password?`
method (and using the name `password?` breaks some of Devise's
validation code).
Ahh, I had assumed the `uid` provided by NeoPass would be the user's
Neopets username, but in hindsight that was never gonna work out since
NeoPass doesn't think of things in terms of usernames at all!
For now, we create 100% random NeoPass usernames, of the form
"neopass-shoyru-5812" or similar. This will be an important fallback
anyway, because it's possible to have a NeoPass with *no* Neopets.com
account attached.
But hopefully we'll be able to work with TNT to request the user's main
Neopets account's username somehow, to use that as the default when
possible!
Ah right, I went and checked the Devise source code, and the default
implementation for `password_required?` is a bit trickier than I
expected:
```ruby
def password_required?
!persisted? || !password.nil? || !password_confirmation.nil?
end
```
Looks like `super` does a good enough job here, though! (I'm actually
kinda surprised, I wasn't sure how Ruby's `super` rules worked, and
this isn't a subclass thing—or maybe it is, maybe the `devise` method
adds a mixin? Idk! But it does what I expect, so, great!)
So now, we require the password if 1) Devise doesn't see a UI reason
not to, *and* 2) the user isn't using OmniAuth (i.e. NeoPass).
This had caused a bug where it was impossible to use the Settings page
*without* changing your password! (The form says it's okay to leave it
blank, which stopped being true! But now it's fixed!)
Whew, exciting! Still done nothing against the live NeoPass server, but
we've got this fully working with the development server, it seems!
Wowie!!
This is all still hidden behind secret flags, so it's fine to deploy
live. (And it's not actually a problem if someone gets past to the
endpoints behind it, because we haven't actually set up real
credentials for our NeoPass client yet, so authentication will fail!)
Okay time to lie down lol.
In this change, we wire up a new NeoPass OAuth2 strategy for OmniAuth,
and hook up the "Log in with NeoPass" button to use it!
The authentication currently fails with `invalid_credentials`, and
shows the `owo` response we hardcoded into the NeoPass server's token
response. We need to finally follow up on the little `TODO` written in
there!
If you pass `?neopass=1` (or a secret value in production), you can see
the "Log in with NeoPass" button, which currently takes you to
OmniAuth's "developer" login page, where you can specify a name and
email and be redirected back. (All placeholder UI!)
We're gonna strip the whole developer strategy out pretty fast and
replace it with one that uses our NeoPass test server. This is just me
checking my understanding of the wiring!
This is setting us up for NeoPass, but first we're just gonna try stuff
with the "developer" strategy that's built in for testing, rather than
using the NeoPass dev server!
Nice, just turning it on seemed to do all we need for now!
Fair questions to be asked about like, should you be able to look up by username instead of email? But like idk, this feels simpler *and* more solid, to give you feedback on if it's the right email.
Hey nice!!
Note that I removed an account delete button from the settings page. You can still send a DELETE request to the right endpoint to do it, but it's not gonna delete all the associated records, and I wanna think a bit about how to handle that better before exposing that button.
A lot of rough edges here (e.g. no styles on the flash messages), but it's working and that's good!!
I tested this by temporarily switching to the production database and logging in as matchu!
Still missing a lot of big features too, like registration, password resets, settings page, etc.
No user-facing functionality here yet, just configuring the database connection to work with openneo_id records.
This is a first step in integrating Devise stuff into this app instead of connecting with a weird second app.
My basic testing for this was to temporarily connect to production `openneo_id`, and see `AuthUser.first` correctly return a user!
