----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com>
To: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian(a)redhat.com>
Cc: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Monday, 13 October, 2014 7:33:53 PM
Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Authentication SPI
On 10/13/2014 1:23 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com>
>> To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> Sent: Monday, 13 October, 2014 4:37:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Authentication SPI
>>
>> We should discuss whether we need to reshuffle our prioritization.
>> Also, personally, I don't want to be stuck with all the integration work
>> we have to do with Tomcat, Jetty, BRMS, etc. :)
>
> Fair enough, I reckon one adapter each this time around then let's take a
> break? Highest priority should be what's needed for xPaaS I think (so
> UberFire, BMRS, Fuse, Fuse Fabric, etc.).
>
Tomcat needs to be in there too.
> I was still going to do adapter(s), but look at design/architecture for
> this at the same time. I reckon a properly designed Authenticator SPI
> could let us do federation (openid connect, saml, kerberos, etc.),
> password-less logins (fingerprint) and more multi-factor (sms, email,
> hardware tokens). It should also allow us to be future proof whenever
> there's new authentication mechanisms (for example why can't a browser
> prove your identity? that could give you sso to everything web!).
>
Not sure they all fall under the same SPI. You got authentication via
user input (passwords, OTP), identity brokering (SAML, OIDC, Social
login, kerberos), authentication via non-user-input (kerberos,
cert-auth, our auth cookie).
I agree, I'm not sure if it's best to design it as one SPI with a lot of
"options" or as multiple more bespoke SPIs.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com