DEV Community

Navidreza Abbaszadeh
Navidreza Abbaszadeh

Posted on

JWT vs OAuth 1.0 vs OAuth 2.0, What’s the Difference and When to Use Each?

#api #security #webdev #architecture

JWT vs OAuth 1.0 vs OAuth 2.0, What’s the Difference and When to Use Each?

In modern web development, authentication and authorization are critical. Whether you’re building a full-stack app, an API, or a SaaS product, chances are, you’ll deal with tokens, headers, and access flows at some point.

Yet, terms like JWT, OAuth 1.0, and OAuth 2.0 are often thrown around interchangeably, even though they solve different problems in different ways.

Let’s break them down clearly, compare them, and decide when to use which.

1. JWT (JSON Web Token)

JWT stands for JSON Web Token, a compact, URL-safe token format used to securely transmit data between parties.

A JWT looks something like this:

xxxxx.yyyyy.zzzzz
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

It has three parts:

  1. Header – specifies the algorithm and token type.
  2. Payload – contains the data (claims) like user ID, roles, and expiration.
  3. Signature – ensures the token wasn’t tampered with.

Example payload:

{
  "sub": "1234567890",
  "name": "John Doe",
  "admin": true,
  "exp": 1735765200
}
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

When a user logs in, the server issues a JWT signed with a secret key. The client stores it (usually in localStorage or cookies) and sends it with every request. The server then verifies it without needing a session store , stateless authentication!

Pros:

  • Stateless, no server-side session storage.
  • Portable, easy to use across services or APIs.
  • Widely supported in modern frameworks.

Cons:

  • Hard to revoke before expiry (unless using a token blacklist).
  • If compromised, the attacker can access resources until it expires.

Use JWT when:
You need stateless API authentication, especially for SPAs, mobile apps, or microservices.

2. OAuth 1.0

OAuth 1.0 is an authorization protocol designed to let users grant third-party applications access to their data, without sharing passwords.

Think of how you “Sign in with Twitter” or let an app access your Google Calendar. OAuth makes this possible securely.

In OAuth 1.0, the process is signature-based.
Each request is signed using a consumer secret, token secret, and cryptographic algorithms (like HMAC-SHA1).

This ensures:

  • Requests can’t be tampered with.
  • The client never sees your password.
  • Data exchange is safe, even without HTTPS (though HTTPS is still preferred).

Pros:

  • Very secure (since every request is signed).
  • Doesn’t require HTTPS for integrity.

Cons:

  • Complex to implement.
  • Harder to debug (due to signature generation).
  • Superseded by OAuth 2.0 in most modern systems.

Use OAuth 1.0 when:
You’re working with legacy systems or APIs that still support it (like older Twitter APIs).
Otherwise, it’s better to use OAuth 2.0.

3. OAuth 2.0

OAuth 2.0 is the modern, simplified successor to OAuth 1.0, designed to make authorization easier and more flexible.

It allows a user to give third-party apps limited access to their resources on another service (like Google, GitHub, Spotify, etc.), without revealing their credentials.

Instead of signing every request, OAuth 2.0 uses tokens, typically Bearer Tokens (often JWTs).

How It Works

  1. The user logs in with a provider (like Google).
  2. The provider gives the app an access token.
  3. The app uses that token to access resources on behalf of the user.

OAuth 2.0 Flows

Depending on your app type, you can choose from several flows:

  • Authorization Code Flow (for web apps)
  • Implicit Flow (for SPAs)
  • Client Credentials Flow (for machine-to-machine)
  • Password Flow (legacy, not recommended)

Pros:

  • Easier to use than OAuth 1.0.
  • More flexible (works for web, mobile, server apps).
  • Widely adopted, supported by Google, GitHub, Facebook, etc.

Cons:

  • Relies on HTTPS for security.
  • Implementation details differ per provider.
  • Can get complex when combining with OpenID Connect (for authentication).

Use OAuth 2.0 when:
You need third-party authorization, SSO (Single Sign-On), or secure access delegation, e.g., “Login with Google” or API access for external clients.

Comparison Summary

Feature JWT OAuth 1.0 OAuth 2.0
Purpose Authentication Authorization Authorization
Token Type Self-contained JWT Signature-based tokens Bearer or JWT tokens
Security Method Signed with secret/public key Signed per request HTTPS + tokens
Use Case Stateless user sessions Legacy APIs Modern APIs, SSO
Ease of Implementation Simple Complex Moderate
Statefulness Stateless Stateful Can be both
Modern Usage Very common Rare Standard

When to Use Which?

JWT:

  • For authenticating users in your own API (no third-party app involved). Example: Your frontend logs in users and stores a JWT to call your backend.

OAuth 1.0:

  • For legacy systems that still rely on it. Example: Older APIs like pre-2020 Twitter integrations.

OAuth 2.0:

  • For third-party access or SSO scenarios. Example: “Sign in with Google” or letting a third-party app access your API.

Conclusion

In short:

  • JWT = token format for authentication (who you are).
  • OAuth = authorization framework (what you can do).
  • OAuth 2.0 often uses JWTs internally, so they’re not competitors, but complementary technologies.

Understanding these helps you design secure systems that protect users and scale with confidence

What about you?
Have you implemented any of these in your projects? Which one do you find easiest or most confusing? Let’s discuss in the comments

Top comments (0)