Re: [keycloak-dev] Support case sensitive usernames

I would vote for 2). We also have some funny requirements around usernames of an LDAP we import from to be short and numeric because of some SAP system that only likes usernames that way. Instead of using this name as the Keycloak username we used a special attribute and a mapper like you said and this works like a charm for us. Best regards, Sebastian Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Dr.-Ing. Sebastian Schuster Open Source Services (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com Tel. +49 30 726112-485 | Mobil +49 152 02177668 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 | Sebastian.Schuster(a)bosch-si.com Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 B Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten Lücke; Geschäftsführung: Dr. Stefan Ferber, Michael Hahn, Dr. Aleksandar Mitrovic -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: keycloak-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org < keycloak-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; Im Auftrag von Marek Posolda Gesendet: Freitag, 6. September 2019 17:16 An: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Betreff: [keycloak-dev] Support case sensitive usernames At this moment, Keycloak internally saves all usernames in the DB in lowercase. This means that if Keycloak DB contains user "john" and user fills the login form with uppercase like "John", Keycloak is still able to find the user because it lowercase the username from the login form to "john" and then query DB for lookup of username "john" . At the same time, DB queries have good performance as they are not needed to be case sensitive. Also when we import users from the 3rd party user storage like ldap, we first convert them to lowercase. Unfortunately this causes issues for some users, as they have LDAP users in uppercase like "JOHN" and usernames in keycloak tokens are returned in lowercase like "john", which causes issues in some applications. I see 2 possibilities to address this issue: 1) Have a switch at the realm level to support case-sensitive usernames 2) Address this issue at LDAP level and add special attribute to users imported from LDAP More details: The solution (1) has some more flexibility and is not LDAP specific, however it may either have non-trivial performance penalty due the case-sensitive DB searches or it may mean possibility of duplicated usernames different just by cases like "john", "John" and "JOHN". I can imagine that switch at realm level will have 3 options similar to this: * (a) Don't support case insensitive usernames (default value and current behaviour). So usernames are lowercased before saving to Keycloak DB and before DB searches. * (b) Support case sensitive usernames with case-sensitive duplicated users. If this option is chosen, it will be possible to have for example 3 separate Keycloak users like "mposolda", "Mposolda" and "MPOSOLDA". This will mean that users will need to fill exactly their case-sensitive username on the login form * (c) Support case sensitive usernames without case-sensitive duplicated users. If this option is chosen, you will have case-sensitive user saved in the DB, however it won't be allowed to have duplicated usernames different just by cases. So you won't be able to have "mposolda", "Mposolda" and "MPOSOLDA". The third option has price-to-pay as DB searches will need to be case-sensitive and hence may have quite bad performance as mentioned for example in this blog: https://alvinalexander.com/sql/sql-select-case-insensitive-query-queries-... . I am not even convinced whether to ever support this option, I rather vote for no. Performance may be better once we move away from RDBMS to Keycloak.next storage, but not sure. 2) Address this issue at LDAP level and add special attribute to users imported from LDAP. That will allow that LDAP user "MPOSOLDA" can be mapped to Keycloak user "mposolda". At the Keycloak level, the user "mposolda" will have the attribute like LDAP_USERNAME with the value "MPOSOLDA" . In this case, people may need to create protocol mapper, which will map the LDAP_USERNAME attribute to their token. Protocol mapper can be added to client scope, which can be added to all required clients. Not sure if this is workaround or not So far, I vote for (1) and maybe just add the (a) and (b) options. WDYT? Marek _______________________________________________ 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