What I suggested was based on what I saw at our current proposal:
$ kcreg login -r master -u manage-client
Server to connect to (http://localhost:8080/auth):
Password:
If you want to automate it for example in a shell script, unless I'm
mistaken, you have to provide user's password or obtain initial access
token through console. If we're assuming that's the default
flow for automated scripts should be obtaining an initial access token
from console first, that's fine.
Flow for encryption:
1. Admin client retrieve the public key from the server
2. Admin client encrypt's whatever data is sensitive
3. Server decrypt's it
--
On 2016-06-30, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> I can't see why we should consider it though:
>
> a) We have service account support, initial access tokens, offline tokens,
> etc.. All designed so credentials don't need to be stored. Using a user
> account directly is horrible as not only are you potentially exposing the
> credentials, you're also giving all permissions of the user to the
> automation. Using tokens or service account you can limit what permissions
> the automation has.
> b) If the credentials are encrypted, you'll also need to unlock the
> vault/encrypted file. How would you suggest we do that? I can't see the
> full flow here.
>
> On 30 June 2016 at 07:15, Bruno Oliveira <bruno@abstractj.org> wrote:
>
> > Yes, the encrypted data goes into public repository with .travis.yaml file.
> > Only the Travis server is able to decrypt such data and validate it[1][2].
> >
> > Like I mentioned, not a blocker, but maybe something to take into
> > consideration.
> >
> > [1] -
> > https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/encryption-keys/#Notifications-Example
> > [2] - https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/master/.travis.yml#L30-L32
> >
> > On 2016-06-30, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> > > The encryption support in Travis isn't that so you can encrypt sensitive
> > > details that goes into .travis.yaml which is public through the repo?
> > >
> > > On 30 June 2016 at 06:52, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't see the need for that. For the client registration CLI we will
> > > > support initial access tokens as well as service accounts with
> > pub/priv key
> > > > authentication. For admin cli we'll support service accounts. No one
> > should
> > > > be using username/password combined with automated jobs.
> > > >
> > > > On 29 June 2016 at 21:49, Bruno Oliveira <bruno@abstractj.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I'm not sure if it's part of the scope for now. But
> > > >> thinking about situations where you have to automate jobs plus provide
> > > >> credentials without exposing them.
> > > >>
> > > >> My suggestion, even if it's not part of the scope for now is to
> > encrypt
> > > >> it,
> > > >> like travis does[1]. I know that our plan is to deal of access token,
> > > >> but would be nice to not expose credentials not even a single time.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> [1] - https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/encryption-keys/
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2016-06-29, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> > > >> > On 28 June 2016 at 11:40, Marko Strukelj <mstrukel@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Stian Thorgersen <
> > > >> sthorger@redhat.com>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> On 27 June 2016 at 21:26, John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>> On 06/27/2016 07:48 AM, Marko Strukelj wrote:
> > > >> > >>> > I've started work on Client Registration CLI tool. As a first
> > > >> step,
> > > >> > >>> here
> > > >> > >>> > is a design document describing how I imagine the tool would
> > be
> > > >> used.
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >>
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/18SoZ34sY_k7N8ae-WDsvo7QeI-cHkpTURIlUk5dpIhU/edit?usp=sharing
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> > I'll use this document as a spec / guide as I implement the
> > client
> > > >> > >>> tool.
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> > Within days I'll also send a link to initial ideas for Admin
> > > >> Client
> > > >> > >>> tool
> > > >> > >>> > which in principle should allow administrator to configure
> > > >> everything
> > > >> > >>> > that can otherwise be done through Admin Console.
> > > >> > >>> >
> > > >> > >>> > Any feedback welcome.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> FWIW we've already written a client registration tool for
> > Keycloak.
> > > >> At
> > > >> > >>> the moment it is specifically targeted for SAML clients (SP,
> > Service
> > > >> > >>> Provider) in Apache HTTPD but we have plans to extend it to
> > OIDC.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> It is currently in Fedora and will also ship in OSP.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> It is hosted here:
> > > >> > >>> https://github.com/jdennis/keycloak-httpd-client-install
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> The man page for it (formatted for HTML) can be found here:
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >>
> > https://jdennis.fedorapeople.org/doc/keycloak-httpd-client-install.html
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> The man page discusses 3 different ways you can authenticate
> > and 2
> > > >> > >>> different ways client registration can be performed.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> I have a lot of experience with Keycloak client registration
> > tools
> > > >> and
> > > >> > >>> have worked through many issues, I'm happy to share my
> > experience.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> Here are some thoughts/issues you may want to take into account:
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * The tool must be capable of running without interactivity as
> > part
> > > >> of a
> > > >> > >>> scripted installation task.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * It should not depend on a home directory being available.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * If a home directory is utilized how will you disambiguate any
> > > >> stored
> > > >> > >>> state belonging to a script that is run by different processes
> > but
> > > >> under
> > > >> > >>> the same user (possibly simultaneously)? To clarify, many
> > install
> > > >> tools
> > > >> > >>> run as the root user or some other admin user. Each invocation
> > of
> > > >> these
> > > >> > >>> install tools can be run with entirely different parameters and
> > may
> > > >> > >>> execute either in parallel or partially overlapping in time.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > > Maybe I should have included this link in the design document to
> > make
> > > >> it
> > > >> > > clear to everyone what Client Registration this tool is for:
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > http://keycloak.github.io/docs/userguide/keycloak-server/html/client-registration.html
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > It's a REST API defined by specs, and is separate from Admin REST
> > API.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > About using home directory, the way I see it - you either a)
> > specify
> > > >> all
> > > >> > > the state when executing a command, or b) you have a mechanism
> > that
> > > >> allows
> > > >> > > the concept of 'session' between command invocations.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If you use the first approach (a) then on each invocation of the
> > > >> command
> > > >> > > you have to specify either username:password, or a token. The
> > client
> > > >> > > registration specification defines workflow for Initial Access
> > > >> Tokens, and
> > > >> > > Registration Access Tokens, which require to automatically
> > intercept a
> > > >> > > newly issued token after each CRUD operation, and save it for any
> > > >> > > subsequent operation on the same client resource. I can't see how
> > this
> > > >> > > could be achieved by using the first approach.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > For the second approach (b) you need a way to communicate
> > 'session'
> > > >> state.
> > > >> > > The state we are saving are just tokens associated with current
> > user
> > > >> or
> > > >> > > specific clients, or specific grants. Looks to me that if multiple
> > > >> parallel
> > > >> > > sessions are in collision about these tokens then the cli tool
> > itself
> > > >> might
> > > >> > > be used the wrong way. Namely, once the client authenticates with
> > a
> > > >> login,
> > > >> > > access token and refresh token are cached. Multiple client
> > instances
> > > >> can
> > > >> > > use the same access token, and the same refresh token. A thing to
> > > >> maybe be
> > > >> > > careful about is just properly locking the file when making
> > changes
> > > >> to it.
> > > >> > > For initial access token you have to explicitly add it, and
> > assign it
> > > >> an
> > > >> > > alias - you can use any random value there if you want. For
> > > >> registration
> > > >> > > access token they are automatically associated with initial token
> > > >> they were
> > > >> > > initiated from - again there should be no collision.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I like the option to have two approaches as there are two use-cases.
> > > >> One is
> > > >> > manually registering for example during development or when manually
> > > >> > configuring an application to use Keycloak. Another is scripted.
> > Even
> > > >> for
> > > >> > scripted you may quite likely want to just add service account
> > > >> credentials
> > > >> > or initial access token directly to ~/.keycloak/ rather than pass
> > these
> > > >> to
> > > >> > the commands.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Registration access tokens are associated with a client, not an
> > initial
> > > >> > access token. Also, remember the registration access token is
> > changed on
> > > >> > updates.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > What alternative mechanism would you suggest for storing 'session'
> > > >> info?
> > > >> > > We want to support Windows as well so it can't be Unix / Bash
> > > >> specific.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>> * The tool should be idempotent.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * You suggest storing tokens in a cache, how do you plan on
> > > >> handling the
> > > >> > >>> case where a token expires before all operations are complete?
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * We also initially took the approach of caching tokens but
> > > >> discovered
> > > >> > >>> the complexity did not justify the minimal cost of obtaining a
> > new
> > > >> token
> > > >> > >>> for each invocation. This greatly simplified the code with very
> > > >> little
> > > >> > >>> performance impact.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * You do not mention what type of client you're registering. I'm
> > > >> > >>> assuming it's OpenID but SAML clients (SP) are equally
> > important.
> > > >> The
> > > >> > >>> tool must be able to handle both.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Marko is probably referring to the Keycloak client
> > representation,
> > > >> which
> > > >> > >> can be either OpenID or SAML. However, we also need to support
> > OpenID
> > > >> > >> Connect client descriptions as well as SAML entity descriptors as
> > > >> both are
> > > >> > >> supported by client reg services.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > The CLI needs to know which of the client registration providers
> > (REST
> > > >> > > endpoints) to use - there are four as described in the Client
> > > >> Registration
> > > >> > > documentation (
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > http://keycloak.github.io/docs/userguide/keycloak-server/html/client-registration.html
> > > >> > > )
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Ideally the input format of the file could be recognised as only
> > > >> > > appropriate for one of these providers, and the correct provider
> > then
> > > >> > > automatically used. But maybe we need a way to explicitly tell the
> > > >> tool
> > > >> > > what provider to use. For example:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > kc new --type default --name test-app --enabled true --base-url
> > > >> > > http://localhost:8480/test-app --redirect-uri '
> > > >> > > http://localhost:8480/test-app/*' --admin-url
> > > >> > > http://localhost:8480/test-app/logout --secret password | kc
> > create
> > > >> > > --type default -f -
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Having to set --type for both creating a description (kc new), and
> > > >> > > pushing it to the server (kc create) is not ideal.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > We can detect the difference between Keycloak client rep, SAML and
> > OIDC
> > > >> > json that's pretty trivial and we should do that. However, there
> > needs
> > > >> to
> > > >> > be a way to specify the provider as well as there could be custom
> > > >> providers
> > > >> > added.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For getting the client it should by default return Keycloak client
> > > >> > representation, but we need an option to be able to specify the
> > > >> provider so
> > > >> > it can return the client installation file instead.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > With regards to creating by passing arguments rather than a file
> > that
> > > >> > should only support client representation files.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * I don't see anything in your document on how to specify the
> > SAML
> > > >> > >>> metadata.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > > Instead of piping in my-client.json, you would pipe in
> > > >> my-client-saml.xml,
> > > >> > > possibly requiring an extra --type specifier as described above.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>> * I don't see anything in your document on how the user
> > modifies the
> > > >> > >>> client. It appears as if you are retrieving a
> > ClientRepresentation
> > > >> JSON
> > > >> > >>> document and expecting the user to edit it in a text editor
> > which
> > > >> will
> > > >> > >>> then be sent back. That won't work for non-interactive
> > installs. It
> > > >> also
> > > >> > >>> presumes the user knows how to read and modify the JSON.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> It would be nice to be able to set specific fields without
> > having to
> > > >> > >> modify JSON. We discussed that for the Admin CLI, but we should
> > > >> probably
> > > >> > >> also add it to the client reg CLI
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > It would be very valuable to see some of the usecases, what kind
> > of
> > > >> > > changes people do on existing clients.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > We should support anything that is in client representation. It
> > should
> > > >> just
> > > >> > be a generic way to change json fields. For example:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > # kcreg update <client id> --set enabled=false --set baseUrl=
> > > >> > http://new-url/myapp --remove rootUrl
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This would get the KC client rep, change the corresponding fields
> > and
> > > >> send
> > > >> > it back.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * Keycloak currently has a few problems with client
> > registration and
> > > >> > >>> it's necessary to modify the client before it will work
> > correctly.
> > > >> We
> > > >> > >>> currently do this via the REST API. How are you planning on
> > handling
> > > >> > >>> these issues in your installer? It would be nice if the
> > installer
> > > >> was
> > > >> > >>> aware of the Keycloak version and could apply "fix-ups" as
> > needed
> > > >> based
> > > >> > >>> on the version.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> AFAIK you have one problem? About not all redirect URI included
> > from
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> SAML entity descriptor. Is that what you are referring to or do
> > you
> > > >> have
> > > >> > >> other problems?
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> In either case fix-ups should be performed by the client
> > registration
> > > >> > >> services, not in the CLI.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * Keycloak has two ways to register a client (client
> > registration
> > > >> > >>> service vs. REST API). The two methods do not produce the same
> > > >> client
> > > >> > >>> configuration (I suspect because they do not share common code
> > in
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >>> server). How are you planning on addressing the discrepancies?
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The task of the CLI is not to address any discrepancies. It's
> > just
> > > >> > >> invoking the client reg services. Any discrepancies should be
> > > >> handled by
> > > >> > >> the client reg services themselves. Have you created JIRA's for
> > > >> these or
> > > >> > >> can you list them to us?
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * The tool should be smart enough to produce a working client
> > > >> without
> > > >> > >>> manual intervention (i.e. the need to run admin cli commands
> > > >> afterwards
> > > >> > >>> to fix problems). Most admins won't know how to tweak the
> > > >> configuration.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Can you list any you are aware of? Same comment as above applies
> > > >> though,
> > > >> > >> it's the responsibility of the client reg services to handle
> > this,
> > > >> not the
> > > >> > >> CLI. Otherwise you'd have different behavior if you invoke
> > client reg
> > > >> > >> services directly rather than through the CLI.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> * The tool should not have significant dependencies.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> It'll be a fat-jar and will have a single dependency on the JVM.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> Those are the thoughts off the top of my head, as you fill out
> > the
> > > >> > >>> details I'll continue to review. Recall the plan of record is
> > for
> > > >> > >>> Keycloak to provide such tools which we will then utilize. The
> > > >> > >>> keycloak-httpd-client-install tool is a stop-gap solution until
> > such
> > > >> > >>> time as "offical" tools become available.
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> --
> > > >> > >>> John
> > > >> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >> > >>> keycloak-dev mailing list
> > > >> > >>> keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > > >> > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >> > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > keycloak-dev mailing list
> > > >> > keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > > >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> abstractj
> > > >> PGP: 0x84DC9914
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > abstractj
> > PGP: 0x84DC9914
> >
abstractj
PGP: 0x84DC9914