Pros of oauth2-server-php

• Longer history and more established in the PHP community
• Supports a wider range of grant types out of the box
• More extensive documentation and examples available

Cons of oauth2-server-php

• Less active development and maintenance in recent years
• May not fully support the latest OAuth 2.0 specifications and best practices
• Potentially more complex setup and configuration process

Code Comparison

oauth2-server-php:

$server = new OAuth2\Server($storage);
$server->addGrantType(new OAuth2\GrantType\AuthorizationCode($storage));
$server->handleTokenRequest(OAuth2\Request::createFromGlobals())->send();

oauth2-server:

$server = new \League\OAuth2\Server\AuthorizationServer(
    $clientRepository,
    $accessTokenRepository,
    $scopeRepository,
    $privateKey,
    $encryptionKey
);
$server->enableGrantType(new \League\OAuth2\Server\Grant\AuthCodeGrant($authCodeRepository, $refreshTokenRepository, $authCodeTTL));

Both libraries provide similar functionality for implementing OAuth 2.0 servers in PHP. oauth2-server-php offers more grant types out of the box and has a longer history, while oauth2-server (by The PHP League) has more active development and adheres more closely to modern PHP practices and the latest OAuth 2.0 specifications.

Pros of oauth2-client

• Simplifies the implementation of OAuth 2.0 for client-side applications
• Provides a wide range of pre-built provider integrations (e.g., Google, Facebook, GitHub)
• Offers a consistent interface for working with various OAuth 2.0 providers

Cons of oauth2-client

• Limited to client-side functionality, not suitable for building OAuth 2.0 servers
• May require additional configuration for custom OAuth 2.0 providers
• Less flexibility in terms of customizing the OAuth 2.0 flow compared to oauth2-server

Code Comparison

oauth2-client:

$provider = new \League\OAuth2\Client\Provider\GenericProvider([
    'clientId'     => 'your-client-id',
    'clientSecret' => 'your-client-secret',
    'redirectUri'  => 'https://example.com/callback-url',
    'urlAuthorize' => 'https://example.com/oauth/authorize',
    'urlAccessToken' => 'https://example.com/oauth/token',
    'urlResourceOwnerDetails' => 'https://example.com/api/user'
]);

oauth2-server:

$server = new \League\OAuth2\Server\AuthorizationServer(
    $clientRepository,
    $accessTokenRepository,
    $scopeRepository,
    $privateKey,
    $encryptionKey
);
$server->enableGrantType(new \League\OAuth2\Server\Grant\AuthCodeGrant($authCodeRepository, $refreshTokenRepository, new \DateInterval('PT10M')));

Pros of php-jwt

• Lightweight and focused solely on JWT handling
• Simple to use with minimal setup required
• Can be easily integrated into existing projects

Cons of php-jwt

• Limited to JWT functionality, not a complete OAuth 2.0 solution
• Requires additional implementation for OAuth 2.0 flows
• Less comprehensive documentation compared to oauth2-server

Code Comparison

php-jwt:

use Firebase\JWT\JWT;

$payload = ['user_id' => 123];
$jwt = JWT::encode($payload, $key, 'HS256');
$decoded = JWT::decode($jwt, new Key($key, 'HS256'));

oauth2-server:

$server = new \League\OAuth2\Server\AuthorizationServer(
    $clientRepository,
    $accessTokenRepository,
    $scopeRepository,
    $privateKey,
    $encryptionKey
);
$response = $server->respondToAccessTokenRequest($request, $response);

Summary

php-jwt is a lightweight library focused on JWT handling, making it easy to integrate into existing projects. However, it lacks the comprehensive OAuth 2.0 functionality provided by oauth2-server. oauth2-server offers a complete OAuth 2.0 implementation but requires more setup and has a steeper learning curve. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your project and whether you need a full OAuth 2.0 solution or just JWT handling.

Pros of JWT

• Lightweight and focused solely on JSON Web Tokens
• More flexible for use in various authentication scenarios beyond OAuth2
• Easier to integrate into existing systems that don't require full OAuth2 implementation

Cons of JWT

• Lacks built-in OAuth2 server functionality
• Requires additional components to implement a complete OAuth2 solution
• May need more configuration and setup for OAuth2-specific use cases

Code Comparison

oauth2-server (Authorization Code Grant):

$server->respondToAccessTokenRequest($request, $response);

JWT (Token Creation):

$token = $config->builder()
    ->issuedBy('https://example.com')
    ->withClaim('uid', 1)
    ->getToken($config->signer(), $config->signingKey());

Summary

OAuth2-server is a comprehensive OAuth2 implementation, while JWT focuses on JSON Web Token handling. OAuth2-server is better suited for full OAuth2 server setups, whereas JWT offers more flexibility for various token-based authentication scenarios. The choice depends on specific project requirements and existing infrastructure.

Pros of PASETO

• Simpler and more secure by design, reducing the risk of implementation errors
• Provides stronger encryption and authentication mechanisms out of the box
• Supports local (symmetric) and public (asymmetric) tokens, offering more flexibility

Cons of PASETO

• Less widely adopted compared to OAuth 2.0, potentially limiting ecosystem support
• May require more effort to integrate with existing systems that expect OAuth 2.0
• Lacks some OAuth 2.0 features like scopes and refresh tokens (though these can be implemented)

Code Comparison

PASETO token creation:

use ParagonIE\Paseto\Builder;
use ParagonIE\Paseto\Keys\SymmetricKey;

$key = new SymmetricKey('YELLOW SUBMARINE, BLACK WIZARDRY');
$token = (new Builder())
    ->setKey($key)
    ->setIssuedAt()
    ->setExpiration(new \DateTime('+1 hour'))
    ->setClaims(['user_id' => 123])
    ->toString();

OAuth 2.0 access token creation:

use League\OAuth2\Server\AuthorizationServer;

$server = new AuthorizationServer(
    $clientRepository,
    $accessTokenRepository,
    $scopeRepository,
    $privateKey,
    $encryptionKey
);

$accessToken = $server->respondToAccessTokenRequest($request, $response);