Re: [Imap-protocol] Seeking clarity on Gmail "Access for less secure apps" setting for non XOAuth2 access
Brandon Long <[email protected]> Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:09:58 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABa8R6uZaZCA+2Bb3qtyJw69xOb0WvdZ3mPRO_EFDTONiwbhiw@mail.gmail.com> |
Anything that uses the user's password is generally considered 'less secure'. Basically, with the high prevalence of password reuse and compromise/exfiltration/phishing/malware/etc, passwords are no longer a sufficient method of proving account ownership. On the web, with a Turing machine available to us and a number of signals and the fact that the user is actually sitting physical in front of a computer, we can mostly ensure auth, but for IMAP which may be from a service or proxy and the prevalence of smart phones which both travel and are often NAT'd across the country, things are much more complicated. So, yes, please use xoauth2 or the oauth-bearer when its available (we're just waiting on the rfc to be published at this point). And as good a time as any to remind folks that xoauth has been deprecated for a while now and will cease to work next year. Migrate your users now. XOAuth2 should be supported as long as oauth-bearer since its has only minor differences being based on an earlier draft, the tokens are all the same. Brandon On Sep 26, 2014 5:36 AM, "Rick Sanders" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > With Gmail is XOAUTH2 the only login method that is not considered "less > secure"? > > For some reason I got the impression that AUTHENTICATE PLAIN was not > considered "less secure". > > Thanks > -Rick > > > -- > Rick Sanders > [email protected] > IMAP Tools http://www.athensfbc.com/imap-tools > _______________________________________________ Imap-protocol mailing list [email protected] http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol