Did the rollback happen?
On Aug 3, 6:56 pm, Alex Payne <a...@twitter.com> wrote: > The rollback should be deployed tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. > > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 23:36, Jesse Stay<jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: > > A timeframe would be very helpful. This is turning out to be a headache as > > I'm testing. If my own user is having to log in over and over to test my > > app, I'm quickly hitting the verify_credentials limit (and I'm even using > > OAuth). I'm getting really frustrated. > > Jesse > > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Bob Thomson <stormid...@googlemail.com> > > wrote: > > >> Hi Doug, > > >> Is there a timescale for rolling back / making the change to the new > >> scheme? > > >> We're just putting the finishing touches to moving to OAuth and we're > >> experiencing the issue when using verify_credentials to get the users > >> basic details once we've got the token back from the authentication > >> process. We're experiencing the issue when: > > >> 1. Testing our login and authentication processes > >> 2. When users login and logout of our application frequently > > >> A heads up on when these changes will be made would be useful. Thanks, > > >> Bob > > >> On Jul 29, 6:37 pm, Grant Emsley <grant.ems...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Locked out of authenticated resources for that account, or will that > >> > IP not be able to login to any account? > > >> > On Jul 29, 1:14 pm, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: > > >> > > Ray,For clarity, we will roll back the current restriction of 15 calls > >> > > per > >> > > user per hour to account/verify_credentials, and implement the > >> > > proposed > >> > > scheme: > > >> > > > ... we will limit the total number of unsuccessful > >> > > > attempts to access authenticated resources to 15 an hour per user > >> > > > per IP > >> > > > address. If a single IP address makes 15 attempts to access a > >> > > > protected resource unsuccessfully for a given user (as indicated by > >> > > > an > >> > > HTTP 401), > >> > > > then the user will be locked out of authenticated resources from > >> > > > that > >> > > > IP address for 1 hour. > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Doug > > >> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Ray <rvizz...@testlabs.com> wrote: > > >> > > > Doug, > > >> > > > I'm in a similar situation as that voiced by TinBlue. This change > >> > > > has > >> > > > affected our iPhone App. We also want to encourage you to rollback > >> > > > this change ASAP. > > >> > > > When you say "This approach is what we are going to take.", do you > >> > > > mean rolling back the fix so as not to affect multiple, successful, > >> > > > authorized logins? I'm hopeful that "this approach" means that our > >> > > > apps will not be affected yet again by changing to a new auth > >> > > > approach. > > >> > > > I appreciate you all keeping this thread informed. > > >> > > > Ray > > >> > > > On Jul 27, 11:23 am, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: > >> > > > > Thanks to everyone who has contributed feedback. This approach is > >> > > > > what we > >> > > > > are going to take. > >> > > > > Alex will be making this change shortly. I will update this thread > >> > > > > when > >> > > > > there is timeframe to share. > > >> > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > Doug > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:52 AM, TinBlue <tinb...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > What is happening? > > >> > > > > > This rollback is taking far too long for something that has > >> > > > > > affected a > >> > > > > > lot of people! > > >> > > > > > On Jul 25, 2:32 pm, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > > > Doug, > > >> > > > > > > I would prefer to adopt OAuth instead of writing code for > >> > > > > > > Basic Auth. > > >> > > > > > > So, you guys need to move OAuth out of public beta into full > >> > > > > > > production sooner rather than later. :-) > > >> > > > > > > I manage 100,000+ Twitter accounts, and I simply cannot take > >> > > > > > > on the > >> > > > > > > support workload of answering user tickets when there's a snag > >> > > > > > > with > >> > > > > > > OAuth beta. > > >> > > > > > > I monitor these forums and the API Issues and still see too > >> > > > > > > many > >> > > > OAuth > >> > > > > > > issues being reported to give me a level of comfort that I can > >> > > > > > > safely > >> > > > > > > switch over to OAuth. > > >> > > > > > > On Jul 24, 5:46 pm, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > Well said Joshua. > > >> > > > > > > > Dewald, you have identified the risk of using basic > >> > > > > > > > authentication. > >> > > > If > >> > > > > > > > your users being locked out due to malicious behavior, you > >> > > > > > > > should > >> > > > > > > > either implement further user-level rate limiting on your > >> > > > > > > > side or > >> > > > > > > > adopt OAuth. > > >> > > > > > > > Are there any other glaring omissions in our thinking or > >> > > > > > > > should we > >> > > > > > > > proceed with this as our solution? > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > > Doug > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Joshua > >> > > > > > > > Perry<j...@6bit.com> > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > Jim's concern is valid, fortunately OAuth is immune to > >> > > > brute-force > >> > > > > > attacks > >> > > > > > > > > once the access key has been issued to an application. For > >> > > > > > > > > this > >> > > > > > reason alone > >> > > > > > > > > I would urge people to switch to OAuth if at all possible. > >> > > > > > > > > I > >> > > > would > >> > > > > > hope > >> > > > > > > > > (and assume) that if login attempts for an account are > >> > > > > > > > > locked out > >> > > > > > that a > >> > > > > > > > > user would still be able to successfully use an already > >> > > > authorized > >> > > > > > OAuth > >> > > > > > > > > driven application. > > >> > > > > > > > > Unfortunately allowing a successful un/pw login while an > >> > > > > > > > > account > >> > > > is > >> > > > > > locked > >> > > > > > > > > out even when the correct password is presented > >> > > > > > > > > effectively > >> > > > bypasses > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > whole reason for a lockout in the first place, preventing > >> > > > brute-force > >> > > > > > > > > password attempts. If an attacker used a dictionary or > >> > > > brute-force > >> > > > > > attack > >> > > > > > > > > and the account was locked out after 15 attempts, then > >> > > > > > > > > they could > >> > > > > > continue > >> > > > > > > > > trying even though the system replied "locked out"; if > >> > > > > > > > > they > >> > > > > > eventually sent > >> > > > > > > > > the correct password it would just bypass the lockout and > >> > > > > > > > > they > >> > > > would > >> > > > > > then > >> > > > > > > > > know the correct password. > > >> > > > > > > > > Perhaps Twitter could implement a selective captcha, I > >> > > > > > > > > know they > >> > > > are > >> > > > > > > > > annoying but if executed properly it could be effective > >> > > > protection > >> > > > > > against > >> > > > > > > > > brute-force and dictionary attacks. Say after 3 or 4 > >> > > > > > > > > failed > >> > > > attempts > >> > > > > > without > >> > > > > > > > > a captch the API would then include a captcha image URL in > >> > > > > > > > > it's > >> > > > > > response > >> > > > > > > > > that the application would then need to show to the person > >> > > > > > > > > and > >> > > > > > include the > >> > > > > > > > > user's response with the next authentication attempt as a > >> > > > > > > > > header > >> > > > or > >> > > > > > POST > >> > > > > > > > > variable. The site stackoverflow.com does this to great > >> > > > > > > > > effect, > >> > > > if > >> > > > > > you > >> > > > > > > > > create posts quicker than a certain threshold which a > >> > > > > > > > > person > >> > > > would > >> > > > > > not > >> > > > > > > > > exceed then they pop a captcha up, in the normal use of > >> > > > > > > > > the site > >> > > > you > >> > > > > > will > >> > > > > > > > > never see one; I've only hit two captchas in the last in > >> > > > > > > > > the last > >> > > > 8 > >> > > > > > months > >> > > > > > > > > using the site. > > >> > > > > > > > > Josh > > >> > > > > > > > > Dewald Pretorius wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> Jim raised a huge weakness with the authentication rate > >> > > > > > > > >> limiting > >> > > > > > that > >> > > > > > > > >> could essentially break third-party apps. > > >> > > > > > > > >> Anybody can try to add anybody else's Twitter account to > >> > > > > > > > >> a > >> > > > > > third-party > >> > > > > > > > >> app using an invalid password. If they do that 15 times > >> > > > > > > > >> with a > >> > > > > > Twitter > >> > > > > > > > >> account, the real owner of that Twitter account, who may > >> > > > > > > > >> have > >> > > > added > >> > > > > > > > >> his account a long time ago with the correct password, is > >> > > > > > > > >> locked > >> > > > out > >> > > > > > > > >> from using that app for an hour. > > >> > > > > > > > >> I believe you will absolutely have to reset / remove the > >> > > > > > > > >> lock as > >> > > > > > soon > >> > > > > > > > >> as the Twitter account uses the correct password. > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Jul 22, 4:58 pm, "jim.renkel" <james.ren...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >>> My concern with this proposal is that it opens up > >> > > > > > > > >>> denials of > >> > > > > > service, > >> > > > > > > > >>> not to twitter.com, but to "associated" sites such as > >> > > > > > > > >>> twitpic, > >> > > > or > >> > > > > > my > >> > > > > > > > >>> site twxlate, among others > > >> > > > > > > > >>> For example, Lance Armstrong is a heavy user of twitpic. > >> > > > > > > > >>> It is > >> > > > very > >> > > > > > > > >>> easy for anyone to find Lance's twitter ID > >> > > > > > > > >>> (@lancearmstrong), > >> > > > view > >> > > > > > his > >> > > > > > > > >>> status updates, and see that he is a frequent user of > >> > > > > > > > >>> twitpic. > >> > > > Now, > >> > > > > > > > >>> someone that is "unhappy" with Lance, say one of George > >> > > > Hincapie's > >> > > > > > > > >>> ardent fans that really believes that Lance was a > >> > > > > > > > >>> significant > >> > > > > > > > >>> contributor to George not winning the maillot jeune > >> > > > > > > > >>> last > >> > > > Sunday, > > ... > > read more »
