Hello, Stian.
I have such usecase where app should be able to work on behalf of some user
for periodic tasks.
But I'm not sure that such case should be implemented using impersonation.
It's too coarse grained and makes attack surface much larger, since it
allows to get access token for any scope including offline for impersonated
user.
Currently I use usernames (which are unique in my case because of my ldap
contraints on users `cn`s) and a little service to obtain all required info
(like email, groups/roles) for periodic tasks via Keycloak Admin API using
service user for this activity. I have to make this service a confidential
client because of bearer-only lacks support for service accounts (so I hope
that KEYCLOAK-4156 will come soon).
Another way to do something on behalf of some user would be offline token
which is intended for such usecases, but it can't be easily integrated to
our system.
ср, 25 янв. 2017 г. в 15:03, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>:
Please have patience rather than repeat yourself. I don't really
need 3
emails about the same thing in my mailbox as I have loads of email to get
through in a day!
I don't really see the use-case for this. Impersonation is specifically for
a user to impersonate another user. As such there has to be a front-end
application as users don't go around manually obtaining tokens to invoke
backend services.
On 23 January 2017 at 15:30, Ritesh Garg <ritesh.garg(a)outlook.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> Any thoughts on this?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ritesh
>
> ________________________________
> From: Ritesh Garg <ritesh.garg(a)outlook.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 9:47 AM
> To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Subject: Keycloak Impersonation feature | KEYCLOAK-4219
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> As of now, Keycloak supports impersonation by an admin user at the front
> end application level. However, if someone is using JWT token based API
> security, there is no existing way to get a user's JWT token "on
behalf"
of
> the user by admin u.
>
> I understand and agree with Stian Thorgersen that this is not just adding
> the return of a JWT token to the current impersonation endpoint. But I
> believe if keycloak supports impersonation; we should support that for
API
> security as well and not just front-end applications.
>
> If we decide to incorporate it; one implementation approach can be to
> introduce an impersonation grant type which would perform client and
admin
> user authentication before granting a token on behalf of the user it is
> requested for. Please let me know if this sounds completely absurd to you
> guys.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Ritesh Garg
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
--
Best regards,
Konstantin Gribov