2:56 a.m.
I assume it's not the third party application that is installing the
plugins, but rather some internal user management application? Having a
third-party app being able to manage consents would obviously defeat the
whole purpose of consent.
I don't have any issue with adding endpoints to be able to manage
applications and the introduction of fine-grained roles. Fine-grained roles
should be added for everything though, not just consents. Also, the
applications endpoint does more than just manage consents it also manages
offline access to applications, so that needs to be considered.
Would be good with a design proposal around this, to continue the
discussion there rather than fragmented on the ML.
On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 17:02, Schuster Sebastian (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) <
Sebastian.Schuster(a)bosch-si.com> wrote:
Hi everybody (and probably especially Stan and Stian),
In some of our projects we want to make heavy use of Keycloaks ability to
obtain user consent to third parties to access user data in our APIs.
In one project, the third parties provide modules that plug into our app
and the user should give his consent for this plugin at plugin installation
time.
We plan to have one client for every plugin so the user can for every
plugin decide which scope of backend API access it wants to grant to the
plugin.
I would be cool if asking for consent would be possible from the app in
its UI at the point when the user installs the plugin.
To do that, we would like to extend the account REST Api that’s currently
in preview state so it
a) covers the “applications” functionality (this is currently a TODO)
b) allows to create consents using the REST Api. I am well aware there
might be security implications here for clients that are essentially
public, e.g. a rogue app could manage consents of a user if he does not pay
attention.
c) use a finer-grained role model for the accounts service, e.g. at
least splitting up view-account into view-profile+view-consents and
manage-account into manage-profile+manage-consents so we can control which
clients may invoke the consents functionality or we can prevent changing
profile attributes
that come from an external IDP in our case.
What do you think about these changes/additions? Do they make sense? If
yes, we would like to contribute them.
Thanks and best regards,
Sebastian
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
Dr.-Ing. Sebastian Schuster
Open Source Services (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2)
Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin |
GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com<http://www.bosch-si.com>
Tel. +49 30 726112-485 | Mobil +49 152 02177668 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 |
Sebastian.Schuster@bosch-si.com<mailto:Sebastian.Schuster@bosch-si.com>
Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 B
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten Lücke; Geschäftsführung: Dr.
Stefan Ferber, Michael Hahn, Dr. Aleksandar Mitrovic
_______________________________________________
keycloak-dev mailing list
keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev