Thanks for the tips! I do love that customizing FusionAuth's theme templates allows you to accomplish pretty much anything. For our use-case - lots of custom forms for lots of tenants - I would prefer to be able to use the advanced registration form feature instead of polluting theme files with JS snippets. At that point I think I might as well hardcode the HTML for the fields instead of adding JS.

I just upgraded to FusionAuth 1.64.1 and am having a bear of a time with styles. Not quite sure where to provide this feedback so I'm just going to drop it here in the hopes that someone sees it. Given FusionAuth's current theming model (specifically wholesale forking of freemarker templates with manual upgrades based on diffs) I think the move to Tailwind was a mistake and would love to see that reversed.

My reasoning is twofold:

1. Before Tailwind was introduced I could keep my style overrides in a stylesheet separate from my freemarker templates. When it came to upgrading my freemarker templates I could easily see FusionAuth's markup changes, diff those with my templates, and work through the migration without too much pain. Styles almost never came into the picture - they just worked across numerous upgrades. Unfortunately now my upgrade process includes a lot of noise since FusionAuth's Tailwind style changes are all mixed up in the markup. This makes it difficult to pick out the important changes to the markup and logic in freemarker.

2. Tailwind itself is ill-suited for pre-built themeable templates. I can't make changes to the Tailwind classes in FusionAuth templates because the CSS is already built (e.g. I can't reference a Tailwind class unless FusionAuth used it for the default template), so I'm forced to live in an in-between world with Tailwind and vanilla CSS overrides. Additionally the overrides become quite tricky because semantic class names have been removed (nothing to hook into) and Tailwind's generated styles are quite complex (e.g. border-top/right/bottom/left all being set independently for the same border).

My 2c. I'll keep struggling along and will be fine, but I do think Tailwind is a step backwards for FusionAuth themes.

Background

I've integrated a third party OIDC IdP with FusionAuth. This IdP supports a non-standard screen_hint query param on their OAuth authorization endpoint. If the IdP receives screen_hint=register at their authorization endpoint then they will render their registration page by default instead of their sign in page.

End goal

I would like to be able to send a user to FusionAuth with both the idp_hint and screen_hint params set and have the screen_hint parameter be passed on to the IdP's authorization endpoint. This will allow me to render a "Create account" button in my app that will send the user straight to the IdP's registration page.

What I've tried

I've tried digging through FusionAuth docs, poking around our custom freemarker templates, watching the network tab, and searching through this forum but have come up short. An adjustment to our custom freemarker theme templates seemed like the best bet, but it appears the IdP authorization request is constructed on the server so no amount of tinkering with client-side logic can add a custom parameter. I also want to make sure that this parameter is compatible with idp_hint, and I'm not confident any client-side theme logic would be compatible with that since idp_hint is designed to skip the UI.

Any solutions or workarounds would be appreciated!

@mark-robustelli No worries, we do have a working setup now after a slew of theme tweaks. That said there is still an outstanding question and a possible bug (both low priority).

The question: What happened to the ability to complete an oauth authentication flow by POSTing a code to /oauth2/passwordless? That worked in 1.48.3 but not in 1.55.1.

The potential bug: Why does a GET call to /oauth2/passwordless/<invalid code> redirect the user to the browser confirmation page (even when the request is from the same browser) instead of an invalid code page?

@mark-robustelli Correct. I'm aware we're in uncharted territory and can't expect everything to work smoothly across upgrades, but TBH I don't think our solution is quite as bad as it sounds.

The form is a single input that, when a code is entered, triggers the same request that would fire if the user clicked a magic link in an email. Conceptually we are very close to the built-in flow except that we categorically exclude all of the link verifier bugs and cross-browser complications of the built-in flow.

Regarding the passwordless API, unfortunately that would mean we'd lose the FusionAuth SSO session (source) which is a key feature for us.

@mark-robustelli This is great, didn't know it existed. We were on an older version of FusionAuth that didn't support the log. Thanks!

Hi all,

We're currently on 1.48.3 and are attempting to upgrade to 1.55.1. The only sticking point for us seems to be a change to the magic links API.

Background

We use FusionAuth's built-in magic links flow with two exceptions:

1. We have a custom passwordless email template that includes the code in large text for the user to read/copy instead of embedded in a link for them to click.
2. We've updated the OAuth2 passwordless theme file to render a form where the user can enter the code manually. The form is shown after the user requests a passwordless email (in place of the "check your email" message rendered by default).

When a user enters a code in the form we send a POST request to /oauth2/passwordless containing a "code" field set to the code, a "postMethod" field set to "true", and all the standard oauth fields via the "@oauthHiddenFields" helper.

This worked perfectly in 1.48.3. A valid code would authenticate the user and redirect them back to our app. An invalid code would re-render the page with an error message.

This provides users with a nice Slack-like OTP auth flow and sidesteps all the issues with one-time links taking users to the wrong browser or getting invalided by link verifiers.

The problem

This flow doesn't work in 1.55.1. Specifically our custom form that POSTs the code to /oauth2/passwordless results in the page just reloading without authenticating the user.

In an attempt to fix the problem I updated the custom form to redirect the user to /oauth2/passwordless/<code> per this post. That does actually fix the sign in flow if the code is valid! However if the code is invalid then the user is redirected to the new confirmation page meant to protect against email client link verifiers*. When the user clicks the "Confirm" button they are redirected back to the app without an error message (and obviously without being signed in as the code was invalid).

*My guess is that this feature is the reason that the behavior of the /oauth2/passwordless endpoint changed.

We could potentially "fix" the invalid code flow by updating the theme file for the new confirmation page to redirect the user back to the passwordless page, probably with a query param indicating that an error message should be shown. Because we use manual code entry instead of links the user is forced to complete sign in where they started. The confirmation page should never be shown in this case, so updating it to redirect should be safe. This feels like a hack that we'll regret though.

The question

What changed with the /oauth2/passwordless API, and what is the best way to continue supporting Slack-like OTP sign in codes (without hacking our FusionAuth theme to bits if possible)?

Thanks!

We realized that a webhook of ours, listening to user.create.complete events, has been logging failures for some time. We can see errors in the System Event Log in the form "Webhook [<url>] returned response code [500] when sending [UserCreateComplete] event with Id [<uuid>]". The url is the endpoint listening to events and the uuid appears to be a random ID for the event.

The problem we are facing is not that the original webhook failed (we think we may know what the issue was with our endpoint), but that we have no idea which users it failed for and can't rectify the situation. The error logs don't contain any actionable information and we can't find any webhook event history in the FusionAuth dashboard or the database.

Is there any way to get the id of the user that triggered the webhook that failed? Or is there any way for us to replay a failed webhook after the 3 retries are up? Or can we configure more retries over a longer period?

@vatsal We did not

We're self-hosting FusionAuth's Docker image on the Starter plan. We'd love to pipe event logs to stdout so that our log infrastructure picks them up and sends them to Grafana without the need for us to write a custom ingester. Is this possible? Or is there a reason we shouldn't do this?

We've resolved this issue. Turns out our CDN had cached FusionAuth's redirects to /maintenance-mode-failed that were triggered during a previous db outage. We're investigating why our CDN cached these redirects as it's configured to respect the headers sent by FusionAuth.