On 25 January 2016 at 09:54, Marek Posolda <mposolda@redhat.com> wrote:
Not sure about that. IMO seconds are good to have more fine grained timeout values. For example in some deployment the "Access token timeout" value 1 minute might be too short, but 2 minutes are too long, so they prefer to use 90 seconds as compromise.

I disagree, I really don't see anyone needing to set timeouts in second granularity,
 

Also seconds are good for development. For example, I am sometimes using seconds for testing (IE. setting timeout to 10 seconds to quickly enforce refresh etc)

Skip seconds to address KEYCLOAK-1341 looks to me like workaround rather than real solution. The question is if we should address KEYCLOAK-1341 at all? There are probably many possibilities how can admin breaks the login to admin console itself or break the keycloak entirely. Few examples, which come to my mind (there are likely much more):
- Delete or disable security-admin-console client

We're going to prevent users from deleting internal clients and roles, so that won't be a problem anymore
 
- delete or disable himself

Can be recovered by adding new user using add-user script
 
- remove roles from himself

Same as above
 
- remove scopes from security-admin-console client

We haven't covered that one
 
- configure authentication flow in some way that it's not possible login anymore

Not covered either
 
- Timeouts

I don't think that we should try to prevent all of these situations. I didn't see any real support questions related to this. And for example in linux if you do "rm -rf /home" the system is broken as well. Isn't this kind of similar? IMO admins should do backup of database, so they can revert if they accidentally mis-configure things.

What you are saying makes no sense whatsoever. It's like saying validation in user interfaces is a waste of time.

Validation in user interfaces are there to help people, and to prevent people doing things that will screw things up. This is an really good example of where lack of validation on inputs allows users to set stupid values. 1 second timeouts never makes any sense, so why should we let users set it. It could also be a mistake as someone wanted to set 1 minute, but selected second by mistake.

Arguing against preventing people from screwing things up for themselves by coming with another example where they can screw things up is just not good argumentation. We should do as much as we can, and in this case it's a very simple fix that could prevent a rather annoying issue.
 

Marek

On 21/01/16 20:45, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
Do we need to have seconds at all for token timeouts? Removing seconds from token would make it simpler, but also make sure no one sets timeouts that are to short (see https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-1341)


_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev