Re: [keycloak-dev] Certificate Management, Directory Services and Device Registration

----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Bill Burke"<bburke(a)redhat.com> > >To:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org > >Sent: Friday, 20 December, 2013 8:42:06 PM > >Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Certificate Management, Directory Services and Device Registration > > > > > > > >On 12/20/2013 3:27 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote: >> > >Some of this is what I hear from users, customers and the industry. Also >> > >see below: >> > > >> > >On 12/20/2013 02:23 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote: >>> > >>Bill brought out some thoughts in my mind which I want to capture here >>> > >>to see what your thoughts are: >>> > >> >>> > >>* Certificate Management >>> > >>- We need a good system to CRUD certificates. The only good Java based >>> > >>oss I have seen is EJBCA. EJBCA is a no-go as it's looks like it's heavily dependent on JavaEE. For LiveOak we need whatever libraries we use to be non-JavaEE.

>>> > >> >>> > >>* Directory Server/Services >>> > >>- We have ApacheDS and OpenDS (or the ForgeRock version) as two >>> > >>possibilities in Java based directory servers. I am unsure if we have >>> > >>really explored building a solution for directory services. >> > >* Another important consideration is Active Directory. It is an >> > >ecosystem - has LDAP, Kerberos/SPNego, SAML, WSTrust etc. I think we >> > >really need some type of Open Source solution to this ecosystem. The >> > >core starts with directory services or a facade. >> > > > > > >A huge part of Keycloak's value-add is it provides the UI for login, > >registration, acct/credential/device/realm management. If these AD/LDAP > >services are read-only, then there's not a lot Keycloak can offer you. > > > >Also, for Keycloak 1.0.Final, we're focusing solely on securing Web Apps > >and RESTful services. We can't have too many tangents or feature creep. We can't wait to long to support mobile devices (at least Android and iOS). These would be required by both LiveOak and AeroGear. Not sure if that's before or after a 1.0.Final though. AeroGear guys can probably help us out here though, as they're working on OAuth2 libraries.