8:56 a.m.
Thanks for your clear answer Pedro, I understand the vision that KC is aiming to achieve
and now I know what requirements I’m going to be able to cover with the KC approach.
Also, following the Arthur concerns, IMO the in-house security solutions that were built
using PL are going to follow a different path from KC and will have to be maintained with
resources inside the company or they can extend the SPI that will be provided by KC and
this still will require a high inside resources demand.
I think KC will work for my needs and I will be interested in contributing if it’s
possible. I’m looking forward to test the Authz server.
Regards,
Cristhian.
On Oct 19, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Arthur Gregório
<arthurshakal(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Then KC will not have a model in the style of the PL?
This means that those who used the PL hoping that everything in it was in KC turned out
to have a framework discontinued and with no more updates?
Or the PL as it exists today will continue to be developed and there will be a plus
integration with KC?
I am very confused by the merge of the projects, it appears that the security of my
system already died before were born.
at.,
Arthur P. Gregório
+55 45 9958-0302
@gregorioarthur
www.arthurgregorio.eti.br <http://www.arthurgregorio.eti.br/>
2015-10-19 10:24 GMT-02:00 Pedro Igor Silva <psilva(a)redhat.com
<mailto:psilva@redhat.com>>:
Hey Crhisthian,
As Bill said, we are working on an Authz Server for Keycloak in order to provide
fine-grained permissions. It is still a working in progress, although we already have a
baseline for a first release which will happen very soon.
From a migration perspective, while PL provides a rich Permission Java API, Keycloak
will provide a distributable authorization server based on a RESTful API to manage
resources, policies, evaluate policies, obtain entitlements and plus other goodies. In
other words, Keycloak will become a PAP (Policy Administration Point), a PDP (Policy
Decision Point) and a Entitlements Server. Everything based on OpenID Connect (and of
course, oAuth2).
As you know, Keycloak is a feature rich, OOTB and easy to use security as a service
solution. We are considering these same premises for the authz server, so you can protect
web apps, RESTful APIs or any other resources very easily. For instance, you'll be
able to write policies using JBoss Drools, EL and easily extend your existing oAuth2
clients in order ask for permissions or enforce them (in case your client acts as a
resource server).
I'm afraid there will be no "migragration path" between PL and KC, at
this sense. But we can work together to make this migration easier. For instance, we are
going to provide a Protection API which can be used to manage resources and policies
remotely.
Regards.
Pedro Igor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cristhian Camilo Lopez" <calovi86(a)gmail.com
<mailto:calovi86@gmail.com>>
To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 3:16:30 PM
Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Authz Model Implementation
Hi Pedro,
I'm migrating from Picketlink, but I haven't found the way to use fine-grained
permissions, Could u give me some advice on this ?
Thanks,
Cristhian.
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>