feat: Provider Models (AuthProvider + concrete types) by demolaf · Pull Request #2223 · firebase/FirebaseUI-Android

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

demolaf · 2025-09-23T15:37:08Z

Precondition validations for auth provider configurations including Google email scope warnings, Facebook dependency checks, and phone number format validation
Provider-specific validation rules for email link settings, anonymous provider restrictions, and duplicate provider detection
Tests for all auth provider validation scenarios and configuration edge cases

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:27:50Z

+ * which is required for security when upgrading anonymous users. Defaults to true.
+ */
+
+ val isEmailLinkForceSameDeviceEnabled: Boolean = true,


this was a requirement and a config validation in the old auth library for EmailAuthProvider. When anonymous upgrade is enabled and email link is enabled, you must force same device for security purposes. here

demolaf · 2025-09-24T07:35:40Z

- )
+ ) {
+ fun validate(context: Context) {
+ // TODO(demolaf): do we need this? since we are requesting this in AuthProvider.Google?


do we need to validate missing server client id?

Was the validation done on the current version of the library?

Yes but if you look reference in current version, when serverClientId is missing throws if not found during actual use.

@test

- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

feat: added preconditions for specific auth provider configurations
478ef63

demolaf marked this pull request as draft September 23, 2025 15:37

test: covers auth providers with config validations
715e659

demolaf commented Sep 24, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadauth/src/main/java/com/firebase/ui/auth/compose/configuration/AuthProvider.kt

demolaf commented Sep 24, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadauth/src/main/java/com/firebase/ui/auth/compose/configuration/AuthProvider.kt

demolaf commented Sep 24, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadauth/src/main/java/com/firebase/ui/auth/compose/configuration/AuthProvider.kt Outdated

demolaf marked this pull request as ready for review September 24, 2025 07:50

fix: auth provider validation and tests
676a4c5
- validate serverClientId empty string - validate applicationId empty string - remove @test(expected=) not descriptive - tests covering AuthProviders Google and Facebook config validation

Lyokone approved these changes Sep 24, 2025
View reviewed changes

Lyokone merged commit f1dfd0c into firebase:version-10.0.0-devSep 24, 2025
2 checks passed

demolaf mentioned this pull request Oct 2, 2025
release: internal release candidate (2025-10-02) #2232
Closed

demolaf mentioned this pull request Nov 26, 2025
release: internal release candidate (2025-10-02) #2275
Merged