Re: [keycloak-dev] security proxy prototype
Bill,
Is not that similar with PicketLink's Http Security [1] ?
Of course, your work is providing that from outside the app. While in PicketLink you
need the configuration in your app. But that can be easily changed.
[1] http://docs.jboss.org/picketlink/2/latest/reference/html-single/#chap-Htt...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com>
To: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 1:58:10 PM
Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] security proxy prototype
On 11/21/2014 10:35 AM, Stan Silvert wrote:
On 11/21/2014 8:48 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
>
> On 11/21/2014 8:25 AM, Stan Silvert wrote:
>>> As a side effect, we now have a pure Undertow adapter.
>> I thought I already refactored our Undertow adapter to be pure?
>>
> I didn't see an adapter. Just abstract classes.
>
Ah, you are right. I got rid of the dependency on the Servlet API but I
never provided a concrete extension of UndertowKeycloakAuthMech.
I've actually got one on my local box. Should I add it to the Undertow
adapter?
I already did it and already use it in the proxy.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev