Re: [keycloak-dev] Allow access_type parameter to be sent to Google Identity Provider

I'm afraid I cannot agree, the key element is "unless you really need one". The use case for access_type=offline is just that, in case you need to refresh tokens offline (i.e. when the user is not at the browser). Forbidding a use case explicitly allowed and supported by google cannot be correct. I agree with Marek about the fact that allowing users to configure forwarded parameters is the simplest and more general solution, even though it is not the most user-frlendly, since people might not know they need to add access_type as a forwarded parameter. Maybe it can be mitigated through documentation for Google Identity Provider. Should I open a Jira before submitting a PR? Cheers *Francesco* On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 15:09, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I'm not convinced about this approach for two reasons: it's not very > user-friendly and secondly it's not correct to request an offline token > unless you really need one. > > Google doesn't use refresh tokens for regular sessions, but rather give > you a fairly long expiration token. As it's lacking the refresh token it > means you need to refresh the token with a redirect. This can be done with > a hidden iframe. So the correct approach here is to have the app refresh > the token by re-auth to KC with a redirect (which can be in a hidden > iframe). This will do it in a proper way without using offline tokens. > > > > On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 14:32, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I already saw some request(s) in the past with regards to the >> GoogleIdentityProvider not provide same level of fine-grained >> configuration as the OIDC Identity provider. I think that generally it >> will be nice to remove this limitation(s) and hence allow some custom >> configurations to be done on the GoogleIdentityProvider as well. >> >> So IMO the best would be the option (b) - just add the option to support >> forwarded parameters. This will probably allow best flexibility and >> hopefully the usability will be also fine. >> >> Marek >> >> On 12/03/2019 11:19, Francesco Degrassi wrote: >> > Hello, >> > we're testing Keycloak with Google as a social identity provider and >> using >> > the token exchange functionality to get access to the IDP access token. >> > I noticed that Google requires the access_type parameter to be set to >> > "offline" in the call to the authorization endpoint to release a >> refresh >> > token, but there is no easy way to do this in Keycloak; configuring a >> > generic OIDC identity provider allows me to configure access_type as a >> > forwarded parameter, but no such option exists using >> GoogleIdentityProvider. >> > >> > I have a patch that (a) modifies GoogleIdentityProviderConfig and >> overrides >> > getForwardedParameters() to add "access_type" to the returned values. >> > >> > Other options I considered include (b) changing the UI to allow to >> > configure the forwareded parameters for GoogleIdentityProvider (since >> it >> > extends OidcIdentityProvider) or (c) add a boolean configuration >> option to >> > GoogleIdentityProviderConfig to allow/disallow forwarding the >> parameter or >> > (d) add a boolean configuration option to GoogleIdentityProviderConfig >> to >> > set "access_type" to "offline" if checked. >> > >> > Which would be the preferred route? Would a pull request be accepted? >> > Cheers. >> > >> > *Francesco Degrassi* >> > Tech Lead >> > +39 329 4128 422 <+39+329+4128+422> >> > *OptionFactory <http://www.optionfactory.net/>* >> > _______________________________________________ >> > keycloak-dev mailing list >> > keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> keycloak-dev mailing list >> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev >> >