2:39 a.m.
Hi,
That sounds good !
Just one question, instead of using the callApi function couldn't we pass
the oauth module (called 'thing' in your example) to the pipe directly,
using the 'authenticator' setting. Behind the scene, the pipe manager will
append the oauth token to the query or add the bearer header ?
Seb
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com>wrote:
OAuth2 AeroGear Workflow - High LevelUsing Google api's
*Server Side*
1. user needs to first create an "application/project" to get an api
key
2. Then they would choose the services/api's then would like there
application to access
3. other google server related items....
*Client Side*
1. Create a new OAuth2 module thing
2. Get access token for the services would need to specify the
services they would like to access
3. validate the token
4. make calls to the service
API
var thing = AerGear.OAuth2({
name: googleEndPoints, //Just a Name
clientID: "12345" //The client ID of the app from the API
console
settings: {
permissions: "..",
...
}
}).somecoolmodulename.googleEndPoints;
*Settings: Multiple settings based on paramters
here<https://developers.google.com/accounts/docs/OAuth2UserAgent>
*
*Methods*
authenticate
this will authenticate with the server to get the access token and then
validate the token, once that is all good then the response is returned.
thing.authenticate({
success:{},
error:{},
settings: {
//probably some settings here, like URL overides and such
}
});
callApi
not really a good name, but it would basically call the remote
api/services. we could either do a query string option or a Head option
example:
curl
'https://www.googleapis.com/oauth2/v1/userinfo?access_token=1/fFBGRNJru1FQd44AzqT3Zg'
or
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer {accessToken}"
https://www.googleapis.com/oauth2/v1/userinfo
code:
thing.callApi({
service: "userinfo", //don't really like this name either
success:{},
error:{},
settings: {
... //overridable baseURLs?
}
});
revoke
again, maybe not the best name. calls the "revoke" service, to remove
access to permissions
thing.revoke({
success: {},
error: {},
settings: {}
});
Behind the scenes on all these calls, the "access_token" is beining used
and possibly refreshed for the user, so they don't have to worry about it.
They just need to call authenticate first. Maybe we can have a refresh
method if the user wants to refresh the tokens themselves. this would do
the token "dance"
On Aug 26, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
+1 I think is a good start to us.
Kris Borchers wrote:
I would like to see that but what you are saying makes sense. It sounds
like where I was headed with the Basic and Digest adapters before I ran
into browser security issues with headers. I think and authorization API
that basically just wraps itself around secured endpoints works for me.
--
abstractj
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev