8:20 a.m.
On 13/03/17 22:07, Bill Burke wrote:
Keycloak Proxy was written a few years ago to secure apps that
can't use
an adapter provided by us. While Keycloak Proxy works (? mostly?)
,we've been pushing people to Apache + mod-auth-mellon or
mod-auth-openidc for non-Java apps. I predict that relying on Apache
to proxy and secure apps that can't use our adapters is going to quickly
become an issue for us. We already have a need to write extensions to
mod-auth-*, specifically to support Pedro's Authz work (which is really
nice BTW!). We could also do tighter integration to make the
configuration experience more user-friendly. The problem is we have
zero expertise in this area and none of us are C/C++ developers (I
haven't coded in C/C++ since 1999 when I was at Iona).
This brings me to what would be the next generation of the Keycloak
Proxy. The first thing I'd like to improve is that configuration would
happen within the admin console. This configuration could be made much
simpler as whatever protocol configuration that would be needed could be
hard-coded and pre-configured. Mappers would focus on mapping values
to HTTP headers.
Beyond configuration, things become more interesting and complex and
their are multiple factors in deciding the authentication protocol,
proxy design, and provisioning:
* Can/Should one Keycloak Proxy virtual host and proxy multiple apps in
same instance? One thing stopping this is SSL. If Keycloak Proxy is
handling SSL, then there is no possibility of virtual hosting. If the
load balancer is handling SSL, then this is a possibility.
* Keycloak Proxy currently needs an HttpSession as it stores
authentication information (JWS access token and Refresh Token) there so
it can forward it to the application. We'd have to either shrink needed
information so it could be stored in a cookie, or replication sessions.
THe latter of which would have the same issues with cross DC.
* Should we collocate Keycloak proxy with Keycloak runtime? That is,
should Keycloak Proxy have direct access to UserSession, CLientSession,
and other model interfaces? The benefits of this are that you could
have a really optimized auth protocol, you'd still have to bounce the
browser to set up cookies directly, but everything else could be handled
through the ClientSession object and there would be no need to generate
or store tokens.
+1
I personally never tried Keycloak Proxy, but it's intended for the
applications, which don't understand OIDC or SAML right? So we don't
need another layer of separate KeycloakProxy server, which needs to
communicate through OIDC with Keycloak auth-server itself, but we can
maybe just have another login protocol implementation like "Keycloak
protocol" or something? Once user is successfully authenticated,
Keycloak will just programatically create token and add some headers
(KEYCLOAK_IDENTITY etc) and forward the request to the application.
Another advantage is, that we won't need anything special for the
replication and cross-dc. As long as all the state is cached in
userSession, Keycloak can just read the cached token from it and forward
to the application. We will need the solution for cross-dc of
userSessions anyway, but this will be able to just leverage it.
Marek
* Collocation is even nicer if virtual hosting could be done and there
would be no configuration needed for the proxy. It would just be
configured as a Keycloak instance and pull which apps in would need to
proxy from the database.
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev