ScratchOAuth2
ScratchVerifier is being deprecated, look at the bottom of this post to learn more.

ScratchOAuth2 is an implementation of the OAuth2 protocol for verifying Scratch users by kenny2scratch and Semisol (me) as Scratch does not have native support for it. The API + documentation is available at oauth2.scratch-wiki.info.
The source code is available on GitHub.

Features:

• Allowing one login for potentially multiple sites
  
• Fixing some of the flaws found in SV
  
• Full implementation of redirect-flow OAuth2
  

Note to SV users:
ScratchVerifier will be responding with 410 Gone to all API requests on 31 May and on 30 June it will redirect to the deprecation notice.

Cool - Gonna test my website with it!

plz add my app thing

Hold on are you an admin on the scratch wiki? Normal users can't make wiki subdomains

CST1229 wrote:

Hold on are you an admin on the scratch wiki? Normal users can't make wiki subdomains

@kenny2scratch (who is an admin) is also developing this.

CST1229 wrote:

Hold on are you an admin on the scratch wiki? Normal users can't make wiki subdomains

I am not. At all. Ken made the domain.

I'm trying the api and i don't understand what
is. Is it a string? I kept trying but my nodejs program always fails on getting the user with a base64-encoded token.

9gr wrote:

I'm trying the api and i don't understand what

Bearer <base64 token>

is. Is it a string? I kept trying but my nodejs program always fails on getting the user with a base64-encoded token.

It is a string.
You send this header:
Authorization: Bearer token

Token is:
Buffer.from(“HEX TOKEN”).toString(“base64”)

Also, did you try getting the RT/AT (Access/Refresh token) first? It is needed to do this. (Also ATs expire after a while so you need to refresh them every so often with an RT, the expiration of both are given in the get token endpoint/refresh token endpoint)

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

it looks much more secure imo, but fluffyscratch is easier and better in certain aspects.

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

SSO and secured by the Wiki (I can't do anything even if I want).

9gr wrote:

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

it looks much more secure imo, but fluffyscratch is easier and better in certain aspects.

I will provide a library for JS.

Bump

smileycreations15 wrote:

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

SSO and secured by the Wiki (I can't do anything even if I want).

9gr wrote:

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

it looks much more secure imo, but fluffyscratch is easier and better in certain aspects.

I will provide a library for JS.

as far I can tell it's better because you can embed it in your webpage instead of redirecting to an ugly verification page

Raihan142857 wrote:

smileycreations15 wrote:

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

SSO and secured by the Wiki (I can't do anything even if I want).

9gr wrote:

Naleksuh wrote:

Hmm, does this provide anything over FluffyScratch? It's interesting, but not sure where you plan to go with it in the future

it looks much more secure imo, but fluffyscratch is easier and better in certain aspects.

I will provide a library for JS.

as far I can tell it's better because you can embed it in your webpage instead of redirecting to an ugly verification page

well its the same..

b u m p

bump because I want to

9gr wrote:

bump because I want to

uhhhhh
bumps should have a roughly 24 hour delay

6af4a:e681a:0dacb:0ae3a:d9552:dc1ec:14b34:52782:efcd8:42e9c:1ff5a:9862f:ea58 what does it say?

We Should add Catblocks back! PLS

MrOriley2011 wrote:

We Should add Catblocks back! PLS

This is not the forum post for that, also they've rejected that suggestion multiple times