Re: [keycloak-dev] Create Principal instance with username instead?
-1
We should stick with ID as we can guarantee that it's unique (in the future).
If app starts using the username in their dbs you can end up with situations where the
wrong user gets access to things he shouldn't. For example:
* If user with username userA is removed from Keycloak, then later a new user is
registered as userA
* If we support changing username in the future (this is on the road-map, and IMO it makes
sense to add this with a toggle in the realm to enable/disable)
What difference does it make if it's ugly? If apps wants to display details about the
user they should get the profile. Sadly there's no direct support for this in
Principal.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com>
To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Thursday, 30 October, 2014 11:29:59 PM
Subject: [keycloak-dev] Create Principal instance with username instead?
Right no UserPrincipal is created in the adapters using the user id.
For strictly pure Servlet apps, an ID is pretty ugly. I don't want to
force them to use keycloak code.
So...is it ok to populate the principal name with
accessToken.getPreferredUsername()?
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev