Support Azure OAuth

[lreading]

Describe what problem your feature request solves
Add ability to use multiple passport connectors, such as Azure AD.

Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like to add the Azure AD Passport connector for authentication/authorization. I think it would make the most sense to have this be enabled via configuration, and also allow for multiple passport strategies. For example: export PASSPORT_STRATEGIES="['github', 'azuread-openidconnect']" or export PASSPORT_STRATEGIES="['github']"
This would open up the possibility of adding other passport strategies/connectors in the future.

Additional context
Some questions I have:

• Because Azure AD requires a bunch more config options, would it make sense to implement something like dotenv to make configuration a bit easier?
  • If so, should that be a separate feature / PR to keep the scope somewhat limited?
• Does it make sense to restructure how the passport authentication is configured to make it easier to add other authentication types in the future?

I'm eager to add this functionality, but wanted to see if it's a desired feature, and what the appetite is as far as the size and scope of pull requests.

[jgadsden]

Hello @lreading , yes, definitely an appetite for what you are describing. We are looking towards Threat Dragon 2.0 this year and expanding the ways to authenticate is central to this.
We have a roadmap for version 2.0, and we would like various ways to authenticate - sort of similar to https://app.diagrams.net, as we are also wanting to use mxgraph.

Certainly will accept large pull requests, but try and break them up if you can, and the scope is the whole project - do not hold yourself back

Cheers, Jon

[jgadsden]

@lreading I would normally assign this issue to you, but you have to be a contributor - so add some code and then we can get you on the contributors list. I have assigned it to myself for now

[lreading]

I somehow missed the multi auth when I looked at the roadmap. 🤦

A few more questions:

• For Azure, specifically, is there a preference for back-end storage of models, such as azure table storage?
• Would you prefer this to target the main trunk or the 2.0 branch?
• Do you want feature requests / PRs for individual items on the 2.0 roadmap, or do you plan to use a github project (I see one for 1.5)?
• If targeting 2.0, would you like help refactoring to ES6 before adding additional code?

Thanks again!

[jgadsden]

Ah, I thought I had put authentication into the roadmap, and when this issue was raised I realised I had missed it out. I then added it and that is why you did not see it before, sorry to have tripped you up.

Some answers as best as I can:

• Myself I do not use Azure, so can not say about storage. @andk123 or @mike-goodwin do you have a preference?
• target the main branch please, we can then add it in for version 1.4
• version 2.0 is more of a technology change, forced by our jointjs issue, rather than changes in features
• if we manage to put version 2.0 roadmap features into version 1.x then so much the better
• we have a 1.5 and a 1.4 github projects for the other repos (core and desktop) so I have created a 1.4 github project for this repo
• certainly refactoring to ES6 is appreciated

Hope this helps, many thanks for the contributions to the code base

[andk123]

Hello, no preference in this case. I haven't worked with Azure either, but I would go with the simplest solution in this case (or the simplest for you). I assume azure table storage is well integrated with azure so you should go for it.