@jakub-hajto , you may want to check out the Google Reconcile Lambda documentation. I also found this post that may be useful for you.

@mark-robustelli said in Logout with multiple subdomains:

@ext_figuvini after reading your post again, I think I read it differently. The way the SSO logout works is that on logout, FusionAuth calls all the logout urls for each applications. It would seem that you are correct in that creating an application for each subdomain makes sense and would work. (You can create applications through the API so you should be able to automate this.) Can you try this for a few domains and confirm it works?

Your point is correct. Creating a separate application for each subdomain is a reasonable and correct solution.
When a user logs out of the SSO system, FusionAuth will call the logout URLs defined in each configured application in turn. This allows each application to clean up its own session. Pretty good solution

This is due to non-ASCII characters in headers causing an issue in the FusionAuth parsing code. Cloudflare sends headers with non-ASCII characters (such as cf-region: São Paulo) which triggers this issue.

This is a java-http bug that was fixed in 2024, and released in FusionAuth version 1.51.2.

So, two options:

upgrade to a version of FusionAuth 1.51.2 or newer. This is the recommended approach, but may require some work. as an interim workaround, you can disable the "Add visitor location headers" option from your CloudFlare console. This should not have any negative impact, since we do not inspect those headers.

@valerii15298 said in can't use fusion auth react sdk when fusion auth server runs locally on fusionauth.localhost::

I followed react sdk example https://github.com/FusionAuth/fusionauth-quickstart-javascript-react-web/tree/main

I changed in kickstart tenant issuer to

"issuer": "http://fusionauth.localhost:9011"

and variables to

"allowedOrigin": "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000", "authorizedRedirectURL": "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000", "authorizedPostLogoutURL": "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000/logged-out", "authorizedOriginURL": "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000", "logoutURL": "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000",

and started fusion auth in docker compose, also specified env var:

FUSIONAUTH_APP_URL=http://fusionauth.localhost:9011

For react sdk use this config:

const config: FusionAuthProviderConfig = { clientId: "e9fdb985-9173-4e01-9d73-ac2d60d1dc8e", // even started my app under the same local domain redirectUri: "http://fusionauth.localhost:4000", postLogoutRedirectUri: "http://localhost:4000/logged-out", // serverUrl: "http://localhost:9011", // this one works serverUrl: "http://fusionauth.localhost:9011", shouldAutoFetchUserInfo: true, shouldAutoRefresh: true, onRedirect: (state?: string) => { console.log(`Redirect happened with state value: ${state}`); }, scope: "openid email profile offline_access", };

And when I log in and am redirected back to my app, fusion auth hook does not show me that I am logged in(it does not even send any requests I checked network). But when I strip everywhere fusionauth. prefix then everything works fine. Why does not fusion auth work locally with custom domains?

Cookies on my local app fusionauth.localhost:4000 are also saved after I logged in: https://freeimage.host/i/3FVbSJsWacky Flip

And when I click login button again (or invoke startLogin function from useFusionAuth hook) I am redirected right away to the app since I am logged in. But isLoggedIn is false and useFusionAuth hook does not recognize that user is logged in.

(I have mapped fusionauth.localhost to localhost in my hosts file locally)

#docker #react-sdk

Set SameSite=None; Secure explicitly on the FusionAuth Cookie: this tells the browser to send the cookie with all requests, even cross-site requests. SameSite=None requires the Secure attribute, meaning the cookie will only be sent over HTTPS. Since you are using http://, this won't work directly without HTTPS set up locally.

@Alex-Patterson tunnel rush said in Adding supplementary user data:

@evanm Yes you can use the sub inside of the JWT when making any API call to your backend. In your database this will be a unique Id for the user. You can even get more details about the user from FusionAuth by calling the User endpoints.

https://fusionauth.io/docs/apis/users#response-1

Thanks for sharing!!

@mark-robustelli Yes, it's all working. After the logout flow executes, the sessions that were being left behind on FusionAuth are now being revoked properly. Thanks.

@haziqt have you taken a look at the documentation on How To Us a Proxy? There are a few headers you will need to add.

@robert-regnier Unfortunately, it looks FusionAuth does not support this. I did find an
open issue that you may want to upvote if it is in fact the same issue you are experiencing.

You may also want to check out this blog. It talks about a custom domain using one of FusionAuth's hosting packages, but think it should work in your case as well.

Does anyone else have a similar setup? How did you implement it?

@owork138 Thank you so much for the detailed and thoughtful explanation. Your insights have helped clarify the likely cause of the confusion with the authentication setup in our FusionAuth application. Understanding that the lack of distinction in the session data may stem from FusionAuth’s default handling—and that customization in our Express.js logic might be required—gives us a clear direction to move forward.

We truly appreciate the time and effort you put into outlining potential solutions. We'll be reviewing our current middleware and exploring the recommended approach to better capture identity provider information during authentication.

Thanks again for your support!

@jay-saxophone383 I do believe you can get FusionAuth to work as you described here. Here are some links that may give you a little more detail.

SAML v2 with ADFS

OpenID Connect with Azure AD

Enabling Single Sign-On in an Organization

Product Update

As mentioned above, some of the features described are only available with paid planes and if you need to test them out, you will want to contact FusionAuth and see what can be worked out.

Existing Role Limitations in FusionAuth FusionAuth provides predefined Admin UI roles, which are not modifiable. You can review the available roles here:
FusionAuth Admin UI Roles The default FusionAuth application roles cannot be changed, which means read-only roles are not currently available. Requesting Read-Only Roles as a Feature FusionAuth does not currently support read-only access roles for applications or tenants. The likely reason for this is that users who need to view application/tenant properties often also need to update them. However, you can submit a feature request to suggest adding read-only roles:
Submit a Feature Request Workaround: Implement a Custom Read-Only View

If immediate read-only access is required, consider:

Using the FusionAuth APIs to create a custom dashboard where users can view but not edit data. Relevant APIs for this purpose: Application API Tenant API

Summary

No built-in read-only roles exist for applications or tenants. FusionAuth Admin UI roles are not modifiable. You can request read-only roles as a feature via GitHub. A workaround is to build a custom, API-based read-only view.

@robin-singh said in Getting 403 : disallowed_useragent with Google Auth:

We have android/iOS app where authentication redirects to fusionauth login page.
And here we have Facebook/Google login setup.
Facebook and native login is working fine but with Google login getting Error 403: disallowed_useragent.

Is there any way to directly open sign in for google which will send data to fusion auth only.

Are you trying to open the login in your application? Maybe try to use the system browser to up the Google login and see if that works. Google disallows OAuth login flows inside embedded web views (like those used in many mobile apps).

This is not available today without some glue code.

Currently our suggestion is to use Javascript on the Login page to jam the claim into a meta field that is shown on a Webhook payload, like jamming stuff into event.info.deviceDescription .

Then you create user.login.success webhook, making sure it is transactional. On login, the event is fired that off to your system and then you extract the claim off the event.info.deviceDescription field and make a PATCH call to FusionAuth. In that PATCH call, you add this to a field on user.data.x.

Then once that PATCH is successful, the 200 response back to the user.login.success event which completes the login and triggers the JWT populate lambda. That lambda extracts the claim off the user.data.x field and puts it into the JWT.

It's not pretty but it is the only way to have this work for now. (For self-service registration you can use a custom hidden field, much easier.)

Relevant docs:

https://fusionauth.io/docs/extend/code/lambdas/jwt-populate https://fusionauth.io/docs/extend/events-and-webhooks/events/user-login-success https://fusionauth.io/docs/apis/users#update-a-user

@d-chinguun-0301 No problem. Glad you figured it out. No need for apologies, if you were confused others may be as well. Now when they search here, they will have an answer. Have a great one

This is possible in a couple of ways.

First, to allow users to register for an application on login, you need to turn on self-service registration. From the docs:

When you enable self-service registration for an application and a user who does not have a registration for that application successfully logs in to that application, the user will automatically be registered for that application, and have a registration added.

Then the question becomes, how can you disable the hosted login pages self-service registration form?

To do so, take the following steps:

update your theme to remove the link to the "Don't have an account? Create one" link from any pages, including the login page. You can also remove all the content from the registration themed page and replace it with not implemented or similar. However, a sinister user may still be able to post to the register endpoint and create a user if you are self-hosting, block access to the /register endpoint using a proxy if you are not self-hosting, prevent self-service registration by adding an encrypted secret value to all user accounts you create via the API. Then, create self-service registration validation lambda which will examine the user object. If the user object comes through without the secret value, fail the registration. Otherwise allow it through because it is a user who has logged in.

The self-service lambda may not fire unless there are required fields on the registration form, but that behavior is undocumented and may change.

@hamza-chouaibi Been having this same exact issue for the last one week. When I stumbled onto this and applied the suggestions here is when it now seems to work. I use the .dev TLD instead.

By using a proxy or gateway that supports mutual TLS, you can use it with FusionAuth.

For example, AWS ALB supports Mutual TLS verify where the ALB does client certificate verification. Nginx has similar functionality.

If you are running FusionAuth 'bare' and terminating TLS directly at the FusionAuth server, mutual TLS is not supported.

Hiya,

There are currently no plans to support the full mTLS spec. We are discussing DPoP (tracking issue) internally.

However, depending on your needs, there may be a workaround.

Since the client credentials grant depends on Entities, you can leverage this to inject a client certificate hash into an access token obtained through the client credentials grant.

How this works at a high level:

Client Certificate Registration
During onboarding, your customer (e.g., a bank) registers their client certificate. A hashed value of that certificate is securely stored in FusionAuth (entity.data). The hashing process is outlined in the RFC. Client Credentials Request
When the bank requests an access token using the Client Credentials grant, a FusionAuth Lambda is invoked before the JWT is signed. Augment Custom Claims
The Lambda code looks up the stored certificate hash and injects it as a claim in the JWT. For maximum compatibility with RFC 8705, it is recommended to add this hash to the cnf object in the JWT, like so: "cnf":{ "x5t#S256": "bwcK0esc3ACC3DB2Y5_lESsXE8o9ltc05O89jdN-dg2" } Accessing the Resource Server or API
The customer presents both the access token and presents their client certificate when calling your API. Validation Flow
Your API: verifies the JWT signature computes a hash of the presented client certificate compares it to the x5t#S256 claim in the token Decision Logic
If the hashes match, the request is bound to the correct client and access is granted to the protected resource.

@mark-robustelli

Hello, sorry for away from this topic for a week due to my other ad hoc job,

I've already solved this topic, it's not about setting on Fusionauth or google credential.

but it's because I used google's client id on Fusionauth callback and
after you told me to set applicationId in my Fusionauth admin then I used ApplicationId on google oauth's callback.

that's why it kept return me client id is invalid.

it was right under my nose, but I couldn't see it.

Thank you for reply me, that's very helpful, It would take more time if you didn't help me.

@joseantonio When you add the response_type=code. That should be literal 'response_type=code' not response_type={code} where {code} is some secret. Other than that, you can add additional parameters to the query string if needed. As long as you are not passing secrets in the query string you should be ok.