4 ms·

SSO often costs quite a lot to maintain, given how widely varied the systems are. Seems reasonable to charge for an optional high-complexity and high-maintenan

• terminalbraid 2y ago
  Are you referring to the development cost or just the "keep SSO wired to other orgs in for our cloud product"? Development-wise, SSO standards don't change much and aren't terribly difficult to get up an running if you stick to oauth and saml. By not offering that in a self-hosted open source version where the maintenance is delegated to the user turns this to a naked cash grab.
  • Groxx 2y ago
    The constant stream of B2B stuff that tends to come with it is the real cost. 95%+ of stuff is indeed technically quite standard and Solved™, like with all things oauth... but that last 5% will relentlessly bleed your will to live out of you. Oauth is a massive mess that necessitates libraries with custom tweaks for hundreds of providers, SAML exists but only aging or over-sized B2B touches it so you now have obtuse B2B customers demanding you Address and Attest To Compliance With unrelated PHP CVEs for a Linux distro that's a decade older than the ancient long-term-support version your company started under, plus you're a Ruby shop so wtf even, and... Yeah I've been there. If you can tell B2B to fuck off, it's legitimately easy. If you're running a business around it, they're your major sources of income, you're taken along for their ride and it has absolutely no reason to be Ride-able like that but this is the designed-by-committee world we live in now.