11:26 a.m.
On 1 October 2015 at 20:49, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Sorry for late reply.
On 10/1/2015 3:13 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> * If a user that was logged in using Kerberos logs out the user should
> not just be automatically logged-in again for the current browser
> session. Instead the user should be displayed with a regular
> username/password field, but also with an option to login with Kerberos
Don't like this idea.
#1 Users that want to bypass kerberos have to know to logout first so
they can login as a non-kerberos user.
#2 username/password screen would have to have knowledge that kerberos
is turned on and that the user was logged in via kerberos. I'm don't
think this is possible with the current SPI.
Could we not have a selector or something in the authentication flow that
can select which authenticator to use? The selector could even be allowed
to prompt the user for input, so we could implement a "Is this you"
selector.
> * A variant on the above where if a user has logged-out from Kerberos
> the user would be displayed with a "Is this you?" when login, if the
> user selects yes the Kerberos authenticator would continue, if not the
> regular username/password form would be displayed
This one might be easy to do with current SPI although not sure if
kerberos plugin sets some session variables that need to be cleared.
I was assuming that this option would also require user to logout first.
"Is this you" would only be displayed after a logout.
> * Implement account switcher - where a user can login to multiple
> accounts at a time and select which account to use
>
Not sure how this is different than "Is this you?".
"Is this you" would simply prompt the user if the user is the user that
previously logged in from that browser.
Account switcher would allow a user to be signed-in to Keycloak with
multiple accounts and provide some mechanism for applications to select
which account. Like GMail and others allow you to be logged-in to multiple
accounts at a time.
> Other ideas? Points for ideas that requires no hacks in applications ;)
>
idp_hint is a much different animal, isn't it? idp_hint is provided by
the application. skip_auth_mechanism would be something the user has to
know about to type in the URL right?
We should never have added idp_hint in the first place IMO. It leaks
authentication semantics into applications and also only works if user is
not logged in already.
skip_auth_mech could be implemented in applications as well, but my same
point stands here. It requires applications to be aware of authentication
semantics. It seems that what's being proposed here is that admins manually
add it to the login URL though, but that's just a horrible idea, period.
--
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