issue #1520 Updated authentication.md

[eth-developer03]

You're A Rockstar

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the Cheat Sheet Series.

🚩 If your PR is related to grammar/typo mistakes, please double-check the file for other mistakes in order to fix all the issues in the current cheat sheet.

Please make sure that for your contribution:

• In case of a new Cheat Sheet, you have used the Cheat Sheet template.
• All the markdown files do not raise any validation policy violation, see the policy.
• All the markdown files follow these format rules.
• All your assets are stored in the assets folder.
• All the images used are in the PNG format.
• Any references to websites have been formatted as [TEXT](URL)
• You verified/tested the effectiveness of your contribution (e.g., the defensive code proposed is really an effective remediation? Please verify it works!).
• The CI build of your PR pass, see the build status here.

If your PR is related to an issue, please finish your PR text with the following line:

This PR fixes issue #<REPLACE WITH ISSUE NUMBER>.

Thank you again for your contribution 😃

[kwwall]

IMO,the Docker change (if we want it; I think it's kludge), should be addressed in a separate GitHub issue and PR. Please pull it out of this PR.

[kwwall]

I don't like the fact that this Dockerfile is being changed under the PR that is associated with issue #1520 which has nothing to do with this, so we need a new GitHub issue created to deal with whatever this is trying to deal with.

[kwwall]

Really? What's the point of inserting this all as comments when it almost 100% matches the actual executable docker statements below (aside what was added in lines 24-30)? If anyone wants to know what it previously looked like, that's what Git history is for. Eventually this will only lead to confusion since the comments and the docker statements are not in sync.

[kwwall]

Okay. I do not like this. If someone using Windows previously edited a bash script so it ended up with \r\n as EOL terminators rather than just \n and broke the script, the better way to deal with this is to create an issue for the particular script and just fix the script. This is a kludge, and if we start using this, we may eventually find ourselves having to do this for all the bash scripts under 'scripts'.

Furthermore, if this is becoming a problem, a better way to address it is to have contributors set the 'core.input' attribute in their .gitconfig file. In ESAPI, we mention this:

Finally, we recommend setting the git property 'core.autocrlf' to 'input' in your $HOME/.gitconfig file; e.g., that file should contain something like this:

[core]
    autocrlf = input

and since people have been using that, we haven't had that problem. (And, if they ignore that and persist on messing up bash scripts by using \r\n for EOL terminators, we force them to program for 3 months while wearing mittens.)

So, of course, if we don't execute dos2unix, we don't need to install it either line 27 so it can be removed from there as well.

[kwwall]

I''m fine with these changes. I don't know if we actually want a blank line to start this .md file, but if it's consistent with the other CS pages, it's fine. (I'm just too lazy to check right now.) As for the content changes, it LGTM.