Re: [aerogear-dev] AGPUSH-1047: UPS decoupling from Keycloak

Oh, I think, another problem with the decoupling is, that today we have a bunch of files that know about the URL of the KC server: * https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin... Ok, we could install that w/ bower/npm ?

But, these are also there, and do require the URL: * https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/serve... * https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/serve... * https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/serve... * https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/serve... Ideally this knowledge would not be required / hard-coded

-Matthias On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; wrote: > Thanks Matthias, will take into consideration all of the comments bellow. > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; >> wrote: >> >>> Good morning, today I have a conversation with Matthias about the >>> decoupling for UPS from Keycloak[1]. Also, during the week, I have a >>> brainstorm on some ideas with Stian, to figure out the better way to >>> achieve this. >>> Motivation >>> >>> The reason why we want to decouple UPS from Keycloak, is due to the >>> fact that today is not possible to have UPS and Keycloak in a separated >>> infrastructure. Currently we bundle it. Keycloak is still and will always >>> be our default security solution. >>> >>> There’s no intentions or future plans to make use of another security >>> provider. >>> Actions items >>> >>> During these conversations I identified some action items for myself >>> which I would like to share. Also, I’m going to start to file Jiras under >>> AGPUSH-1047 umbrella. >>> 1. Create a client cli script using Aesh to link UPS with Keycloak >>> >>> The script would ask for admin’s username/password or an initial >>> registration token. >>> >> I think for us it would be best if the script requires the >> username:password of the admin, this helps for a full automation (e.g. via >> Ansible/Chef) >> >> If a initial token is needed, that would mean an extra step to actually >> get it (e.g. via an API call). So, I'd be happy to start w/ the admin >> username:password >> >> >> >>> After that, the script would make use of the dynamic client >>> registration service to create the required clients with Keycloak. >>> 2. Themes >>> >>> For theme definition we have 2 scenarios: >>> >>> - >>> >>> Already existent server in use >>> >>> Nothing will be changed. It’s already an agreement that the current >>> theme should be neutral and not changed. >>> - >>> >>> Brand new instance of Keycloak with UPS theme >>> >>> For scenarios where people want custom theme from UPS, people can >>> just deploy it, exactly like described here ( >>> http://keycloak.github.io/docs/userguide/keycloak-server/html/themes.html... >>> ) >>> >>> >> IMO this is more on the nice to have side of the house :-) >> >> >>> >>> - >>> >>> 3. Creation of roles for clients >>> >>> For the very first draft I’m planning to just import ups-realm.json >>> (manual process) and see how it goes. >>> >>> The ideal is to extend the client registration service on Keycloak to >>> allow creating roles for a client. For now, let’s just start simple — this >>> can be tricky and require more discussion/time. >>> >> >> It would be good if the above Aesh script, would be able to have the >> realm.json file as one of its arguments, so there would be no need for a >> manual import, via the UI. >> This would be generally useful, so we can have in automated testing a >> different realm.json file e.g. to have client applications for automated >> http request against the endpoints. Today, this needs to be done manually: >> >> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/tree/master/node.js >> >> >> >>> 4. Creating of roles for users >>> >>> Same as item 3, for now assume that user exist with “admin” role. The >>> ideal is the creation of a super user to access UPS. For now, users >>> can manually register/import users that can access UPS through the KC admin >>> console. >>> >> >> As on 3) if the script takes in the JSON file for the actual realm, we >> are good to go here, as one can define all the roles in there. >> >> >>> 5. UPS realm >>> >>> Discussing with Matthias we came up with 2 scenarios: >>> >>> - Make use of an already existent realm in use >>> >>> In this scenarios, people want to make use of UPS, but don’t want to >>> have a new realm dedicated for it. We’re going to make use of the dynamic >>> client registration against the realm specified. >>> >>> - Brand new instance of Keycloak with UPS theme >>> >>> For people willing to have a separated realm not mixed up with master. >>> In this scenario we provide ups-realm.json as part of documentation or >>> demo purposes and make use of the dynamic client registration process. >>> >> >> I think the separated realm is a must - also this is a true isolation. >> E.g. I would not ultimately want to expose my "ups test clients" on the >> global master realm, similar w/ users/roles. >> >> >>> Note: We probably can benefit of item 1 to import the json file if >>> necessary. >>> 6. Multiple UPS instances with a single instance of KC >>> >>> It would require to extend the client registration service and some >>> work on KC. Depending on the time, it can be done. But for now we’re going >>> to assume that the relationship will be 1:1, into other words, one instance >>> of UPS and one instance of KC. >>> >> That's fine to assume 1:1 mapping. But I agree that, eventually, this is >> something interesting for Keycloak, not related to the UPS >> >> >> >>> For corp scenarios we would end up with: >>> Test >>> >>> - testing.ups.mybank.com >>> - testing.keycloak.mybank.com >>> >>> Production >>> >>> - ups.mybank.com >>> - keycloak.mybank.com >>> >>> If you have any questions or feedback, I’m listening. >>> >>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-1047 >>> >> >> This is good content, and I like the direction it is going :-) Besides >> my few comments >> >> >> >>> ​ >>> -- >>> - abstractj >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > - abstractj > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev