[keycloak-dev] Pushing Claims from Policy Enforcer

[Bill Burke]

Wouldn't a more generic hook be better.  One that allowed people to add
whatever they wanted to the attributes being pushed?  Rather than having
all this composition login within json?  Not saying I'm right and you are
wrong, just wondering if it would be better?

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 7:26 AM, Pedro Igor Silva <psilva at redhat.com> wrote:

> If you are using the API directly, yes, you don't need this SPI ...
>
> But when using our policy enforcer (embedded within our adapters)
> developers don't actually use our API to call the permission endpoint. This
> is done by the policy enforcer itself, internally. The SPI is mainly
> targeted for applications using our adapters.
>
> The SPI serves for two purposes:
>
> 1) Allow developers to customize permission requests and push arbitrary
> claims to the permission endpoint (extension point)
> 2) Serve as the backbone for built-in "Claim Information Points", provided
> by us OOTB.
>
> As an example, here is how a configuration should looks like:
>
> "claim-information-point": [
>
>     "claims": {
>
>         "claim-a": "{request.parameter['abc']}"
>
>      },
>
>     "http-service": {
>
>         "url": "abc"
>
>     }
>
> ]
>
> "Claim Information Point" is pretty much the same thing as a Policy
> Information Point. Each CIP Provider provides its own way to define claims
> to a permission request. In the example above, you are "pushing" a
> "claim-a" to your policies where the value would be a request parameter
> "abc".
>
> Makes more sense now ?
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 12:49 AM, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> I dont' understand...Why do you need an plugin SPI for this?  Wouldn't
>> the developer just call into your api to create the invocation to the
>> permission endpoint?
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Pedro Igor Silva <psilva at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'm currently working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-4903.
>> >
>> > This is all about allowing applications to push arbitrary claims to
>> > Keycloak prior to evaluating permissions on the server. A simple
>> example to
>> > illustrate the idea: a request arrives you extract what you want from
>> there
>> > (parameters, headers, etc) and "push" the information from the request
>> as
>> > claims in order to evaluate your permissions.
>> >
>> > There are endless possibilities on what you can push and how.
>> >
>> > >From a design perspective, I was thinking about providing a SPI on the
>> > adapter side (as simple as using ServiceLoader) to load built-in and
>> > user-defined "claim information points". Examples of built-in
>> > implementations would be:
>> >
>> > * Extract parameters
>> > * Extract headers
>> > * Extract path parameters
>> > * Extract cookies
>> > * Invoke an external "policy information point"
>> >
>> > What do you think ?
>> >
>> > Regards.
>> > Pedro Igor
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > keycloak-dev mailing list
>> > keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bill Burke
>> Red Hat
>>
>
>


-- 
Bill Burke
Red Hat