The Problem
I have seen this question several times (also in the context of the Firebase Real-Time Database), but I haven't seen a convincing answer to it. The problem statement is fairly simple:
How can (authenticated) users choose a username that hasn't been taken yet?
First of all, the why: After a user authenticates, they have a unique user ID. Many web-apps, however, let the user choose a "display name" (how the user wants to appear on the website), in order to protect the users personal data (like real name).
The Users Collection
Given a data structure like the following it is possible to store a username along with other data for each user:
/users (collection)
/{uid} (document)
- name: "<the username>"
- foo: "<other data>"
However, nothing prevents another user (with a different {uid}
) to store the same name
in their record. As far as I know, there is no "security rule" that allows us to check if the name
has already been by another user.
Note: A client side check is possible, but unsafe as a malicious client could omit the check.
The Reverse Mapping
Popular solutions are creating a collection with a reverse mapping:
/usernames (collection)
/{name} (document)
- uid: "<the auth {uid} field>"
Given this reverse mapping, it is possible to write a security rule to enforce that a username is not already taken:
match /users/{userId} {
allow read: if true;
allow create, update: if
request.auth.uid == userId &&
request.resource.data.name is string &&
request.resource.data.name.size() >= 3 &&
get(/PATH/usernames/$(request.resource.data.name)).data.uid == userId;
}
and to force a user to create a usernames document first:
match /usernames/{name} {
allow read: if true;
allow create: if
request.resource.data.size() == 1 &&
request.resource.data.uid is string &&
request.resource.data.uid == request.auth.uid;
}
I believe the solution is half-way there. However, there are still a few unsolved issues.
Remaining Issues / Questions
This implementation is quite involved already but it doesn't even solve the problem of users that want to change their user name (requires record deletion or update rules, etc.)
Another issue is, nothing prevents a user from adding multiple records in the usernames
collection, effectively snatching all good usernames to sabotage the system.
So to the questions:
- Is there a simpler solution to enforce unique usernames?
- How can spamming the
usernames
collection be prevented? - How can the username checks be made case-insensitive?
I tried also enforcing existence of the users
, with another exists()
rule for the /usernames collection and then committing a batch write operation, however, this doesn't seem to work ("Missing or insufficient permissions" error).
Another note: I have seen solutions with client-side checks. BUT THESE ARE UNSAFE. Any malicious client can modify the code, and omit checks.
Create a series of cloud functions that are triggered whenever a document is added, updated, or deleted in the
users
table. The cloud functions will maintain a separate lookup table namedusernames
, with document ids set to the usernames. Your front-end app can then query the usernames collection to see if a username is available.Here is TypeScript code for the cloud functions:
Created another, pretty simple solution for me.
I have
usernames
collection to storing unique values.username
is available if the document doesn't exist, so it is easy to check on front-end.Also, I added the pattern
^([a-z0-9_.]){5,30}$
to valide a key value.Checking everything with Firestore rules:
Firestore rules will not allow updating user's document in case if the username already exists or have an invalid value.
So, Cloud Functions will be handling only in case if the username has a valid value and doesn't exist yet. So, your server will have much less work.
Everything you need with cloud functions is to update
usernames
collection:@asciimike
on twitter is a firebase security rules developer. He says there is currently no way to enforce uniqueness on a key on a document. https://twitter.com/asciimike/status/937032291511025664Since
firestore
is based on Google Clouddatastore
it inherits this issue. It's been a long standing request since 2008. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/35875869#c14However, you can achieve your goal by using
firebase functions
and some strictsecurity rules
.You can view my entire proposed solution on medium. https://medium.com/@jqualls/firebase-firestore-unique-constraints-d0673b7a4952