2:39 a.m.
On 19/08/16 15:52, Bill Burke wrote:
On 8/19/16 2:37 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>
>
> On 18 August 2016 at 20:30, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 8/18/16 4:59 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> > Bill,
> >
> > Are you planing to have an option to allow import of users with the
> > new user federation SPI? I'm not convinced we should completely
> remove
> > this option.
> >
>
> The only callback that does not exist in the new SPI is
> validateAndProxy(). With the current federation SPI, the developer
> implements everything themselves for import. There are no
> synchronization APIs/SPIs either.
>
>
> Sounds like we're removing built-in features around synchronization
> just to make the user have to do everything themselves.
I think you misinterpreted me, The old User Federation SPI forces the
developer to write all the import code themselves. The old User
Federation SPI does not have any synchronization callbacks, methods or
interfaces other than validateAndProxy(), the logic of which the user
has to write themselves too.
> > Some use-cases I could imagine:
> >
> > * Allow users to authenticate even if LDAP server is down
> Our current LDAP provider will not work if LDAP is down, even
> with the
> import :)
>
>
> Yes, I know. However, the fact that we don't currently support it
> doesn't mean we shouldn't in the future.
If the user can only be authenticated via LDAP, an offline mode is not
possible. In other words, if LDAP does not expose the password of a
user (so it can be imported), then offline mode is not possible. It
would only be possible if the user has logged in at least once, then
the validated password could be imported.
So, do you still think we should support import/offline mode given all
this?
From some recent discussions I saw, it seems that quite many people are
interested in the "import-and-forget" mode. So they need to import user
from their old legacy store (3rd party storage or LDAP) but once user is
fully in Keycloak DB, they want to completely forget about the 3rd party
storage and do all operations around this user against Keycloak DB.
The credentials/password validation seems to be the most complicated
part around this as you pointed, as the password needs to be first
successfully validated against 3rdparty storage or LDAP . Then once
password is successfully validated and updated to Keycloak DB, user can
be "forgotten" and unlinked from the federationProvider. I hope the new
SPI has a way to deal with this usecase? Or at least have a hook, so the
people can easily unlink the user by themselves whenever they want.
Marek
Bill
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev