jwt-auth

Pros of php-jwt

• Lightweight and simple implementation focused solely on JWT encoding/decoding
• Easy to integrate into existing PHP projects without framework dependencies
• Supports various algorithms (HS256, RS256, etc.) for token signing

Cons of php-jwt

• Lacks built-in features for authentication and authorization
• Requires manual implementation of token management and validation logic
• No out-of-the-box integration with popular PHP frameworks

Code Comparison

php-jwt:

use Firebase\JWT\JWT;

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

jwt-auth:

use Tymon\JWTAuth\Facades\JWTAuth;

$token = JWTAuth::fromUser($user);
$user = JWTAuth::authenticate($token);

Key Differences

• jwt-auth is a full-featured authentication package for Laravel, while php-jwt is a standalone JWT library
• jwt-auth provides middleware, automatic token refreshing, and user retrieval, whereas php-jwt focuses on core JWT functionality
• php-jwt offers more flexibility for use in various PHP projects, while jwt-auth is tailored for Laravel applications

Use Cases

• Choose php-jwt for simple JWT implementation in non-Laravel PHP projects or when you need low-level control over JWT handling
• Opt for jwt-auth when building Laravel applications that require a complete JWT authentication solution with minimal setup

Pros of jwt

• More flexible and customizable, allowing for greater control over JWT handling
• Supports a wider range of algorithms and claim types
• Actively maintained with regular updates and improvements

Cons of jwt

• Steeper learning curve due to its more complex API
• Requires more manual configuration for integration with frameworks
• Less opinionated, which may lead to more boilerplate code in some cases

Code Comparison

jwt-auth:

$token = JWTAuth::attempt($credentials);
$user = JWTAuth::toUser($token);

jwt:

$token = $config->builder()
    ->withClaim('uid', $user->id)
    ->getToken($config->signer(), $config->signingKey());
$claims = $config->parser()->parse($token)->claims();

The jwt-auth library provides a more straightforward API for common JWT operations, while jwt offers more granular control over token creation and parsing. jwt-auth is better suited for quick integration with Laravel projects, whereas jwt is more versatile for use in various PHP applications and frameworks.

Both libraries have their strengths, and the choice between them depends on the specific requirements of your project, desired level of control, and integration needs.

Pros of LexikJWTAuthenticationBundle

• Seamless integration with Symfony framework and its security components
• Supports custom token encoders and user providers
• Extensive configuration options for token generation and validation

Cons of LexikJWTAuthenticationBundle

• Limited to Symfony ecosystem, less flexible for other PHP projects
• Steeper learning curve for developers not familiar with Symfony
• May require more setup and configuration compared to jwt-auth

Code Comparison

LexikJWTAuthenticationBundle:

lexik_jwt_authentication:
    secret_key: '%env(resolve:JWT_SECRET_KEY)%'
    public_key: '%env(resolve:JWT_PUBLIC_KEY)%'
    pass_phrase: '%env(JWT_PASSPHRASE)%'
    token_ttl: 3600

jwt-auth:

'jwt' => [
    'secret' => env('JWT_SECRET'),
    'keys' => [
        'public' => env('JWT_PUBLIC_KEY'),
        'private' => env('JWT_PRIVATE_KEY'),
    ],
    'ttl' => 60,
]

Both libraries offer JWT authentication for PHP applications, but they cater to different ecosystems. LexikJWTAuthenticationBundle is tailored for Symfony projects, providing deep integration with the framework's security components. It offers more extensive configuration options but may be more complex to set up. On the other hand, jwt-auth is more versatile and can be used in various PHP projects, including Laravel. It has a simpler setup process but may lack some of the advanced features found in LexikJWTAuthenticationBundle.

Pros of laravel-permission

• Focuses on role-based access control (RBAC) for Laravel applications
• Provides a more granular and flexible permission system
• Integrates seamlessly with Laravel's built-in authentication system

Cons of laravel-permission

• Limited to Laravel framework, while jwt-auth can be used with other PHP frameworks
• Does not handle token-based authentication out of the box
• May require additional setup for API authentication scenarios

Code Comparison

laravel-permission:

$user->givePermissionTo('edit articles');
$user->assignRole('writer');
$user->hasPermissionTo('edit articles');

jwt-auth:

$token = JWTAuth::attempt($credentials);
$user = JWTAuth::toUser($token);
$payload = JWTAuth::getPayload($token);

Summary

laravel-permission is tailored for managing roles and permissions within Laravel applications, offering fine-grained access control. jwt-auth, on the other hand, focuses on JSON Web Token (JWT) authentication for APIs, which can be used across different PHP frameworks. While laravel-permission excels in RBAC, jwt-auth provides a robust solution for stateless, token-based authentication in API-centric applications.

Pros of Sanctum

• Simpler setup and configuration, integrated directly into Laravel
• Supports both SPA authentication and mobile app tokens
• Built-in CSRF protection for web routes

Cons of Sanctum

• Less flexible for complex JWT scenarios
• Limited customization options for token structure
• May require additional setup for microservices architecture

Code Comparison

Sanctum token creation:

$token = $user->createToken('token-name')->plainTextToken;

jwt-auth token creation:

$token = JWTAuth::fromUser($user);

Additional Considerations

• jwt-auth offers more granular control over token claims and expiration
• Sanctum is better suited for Laravel-specific projects
• jwt-auth may be preferred for cross-platform applications

Both packages provide secure authentication solutions, but Sanctum is more tightly integrated with Laravel's ecosystem, while jwt-auth offers more flexibility for complex JWT implementations. The choice between them depends on specific project requirements and the desired level of customization.