Re: [keycloak-dev] A newly added Hardcoded Role mapper ignores users that have already logged in before

> On Oct 2, 2019, at 04:40, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 20:05, Martin Maher <gentoo(a)penguindreams.us&gt; wrote: > Stian: > > LDAP would be my mail client’s idea of a spellcheck joke. It was familiar with LDAP but not with IdP, so it did me the “favor” of “correcting” the spelling “error" and I did not notice. > > > On Sep 27, 2019, at 03:50, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 20:35, Martin Maher <gentoo(a)penguindreams.us&gt; wrote: > >> Stian, et al: > >> > >> It took me a few minutes to read through the entire thread and your last remarks strike me as a good path forward. So +1 for that. > >> > >> The follow-on thought I have about this is that mapping, and therefore per mapper configuration, would best be done on a per realm/domain level. This would address the federation concerns, but it would also mean that there might be an LDAP mapper for the @firstDomain with a different configuration from an LDAP mapper for @secondDomain. > >> > > For the record I was only talking about IdPs (identity brokering), not LDAP. For LDAP we have very fine-grained control already and it also supports read/write sync, with that regards it's quite a different problem. > > > > I think the configuration should be at the IdP level, with an option to override on individual mappers. Not sure why it would be a realm/domain level, or what you actually mean by that? > > What I mean by realm/domain is what I will call the “location qualifier” of the submitted userID, e.g., elwood(a)dev.somedomain.tld versus elwood(a)somedomain.tld versus elwood(a)someotherdomain.tld. Even if all three were handled by the same IdP, wouldn’t it be conceivable that differing requirements might applicable? I can imagine there would be such a case, but would suggest we start simple with a single option on the IdP, then consider something more advanced later.

> >> > >> Proceeding along this path, if you have local admins of the Keycloak system, role, attribute and identity mapping, then they could be controlled separately from some realm/domain for which the Keycloak system has user responsibilities. This might necessitate a “local” option that points to the Keycloak internal data, which would give you four options - > >> > >> • Import > >> • Owner > >> • Force > >> • Local > >> > >> This same method could also be utilized to resolve issues of collision of nominated privilege. I have seen cases in the past, with other systems, where privilege collisions occur because a userID exists in two systems, which each nominate a differing level of privilege and may utilize the same token names for a privilege, e.g., Attribute= fwAdmin / value= superAdmin. > >> > > I'm afraid you've lost me a little. Perhaps it's because I'm talking about external OIDC/SAML providers, while you are talking about LDAP? > > What I was trying articulate was the addition of a fourth option, “local”, to the proposed three “import”, “owner”, and “force”, which would permit the user to be defined only in the Keycloak server db. While this would not be particularly useful in IdP configurations, it would allow for a non-IdP situation, such as locally-defined administrators of the Keycloak system or other small scope use cases. Not sure I understand how that would apply to a config at the IdP level. Users managed fully within Keycloak would not be managed by an IdP at all, hence there's no need for such an option at the IdP level. Unless I'm missunderstanding you that is.

> As for my final paragraph, I put it into the response in the wrong place. The thought was associated with the concept of mappers being able to be unique configured at the realm/domain level, and how that would lend itself to working out collisions of nominated privilege. > > Hope this helps, > > Martin > > > Respectfully submitted, > > > > Martin > > > >> On Sep 25, 2019, at 05:23 , Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > >> Thinking about this some more. I think all mappers for identity brokering > >> should have an option to select sync-mode: > >> > >> * import - only update on first import > >> * owner - if the idp is the owner of the user (the user has not been > >> modified within KC, and only has a single IdP link) > >> * force - always update > >> > >> The mappers that today has a behaviour that doesn't match one of the above > >> could have an option "legacy". > >> > >> On the IdP config itself there should be a default sync-mode user for > >> mappers that haven't explicitly set the sync-mode. The default value should > >> be import. > >> > >> The next piece of the puzzle would be to prevent editing of values that > >> shouldn't be possible to edit locally. For user attributes that should be > >> driven by User Profile SPI, where it would be somehow possible to for > >> example say don't allow editing this attribute if one of the following > >> IdPs. I'm working on a design proposal for the User Profile SPI currently, > >> so we can add that as a requirement there. The same feature could be used > >> for User Federation providers. For roles it is a bit harder, but would be > >> nice to somehow be able to flag what roles are managed by IdP/user-storage > >> and which are not. Perhaps we could add some metadata to the role mapping > >> for that. > >> > >> Would be great to start on a design proposal around this, so we can have it > >> documented the way it should work. Once we have that and have agreed on the > >> approach I don't mind having PRs for individual mappers merged as I > >> appreciate the fact that for this case you want a solution for hardcoded > >> role mapper quickly without having to do all of the work for all the other > >> mappers. > >> > >> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 12:36, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > >>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-8690 > >>> > >>> Adding to my point that we need a consistent solution/strategy for all > >>> mappers. > >>> > >>> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 12:32, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 09:42, EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, > >>>> INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) <external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&gt; wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> That is an interesting point. I checked some mappers: > >>>>> > >>>>> - AttributeToRoleMapper handles the update like the import with > >>>>> the exception that in case of an update, the role is deleted if the > >>>>> attribute is no longer present (I call this for now inverted logic). > >>>>> > >>>>> - ClaimToRoleMapper and ExternalKeycloakRoleToRoleMapper handle > >>>>> an update with the inverted logic only – so they don’t set but only delete > >>>>> the role. > >>>>> > >>>>> - HardcodeRoleMapper fully ignores updates whereas it could at > >>>>> least do it the same way as AttributeToRoleMapper. > >>>>> > >>>>> - UserAttributeMapper is even more complex… > >>>>> > >>>>> So the currently used IdentityProviderMapper implementations are very > >>>>> inconsistent and hopefully documented and understood well for and by the > >>>>> end users. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> It is not documented and I doubt anyone can understand how it will > >>>> function. This is my concern when we have "random" things happening in each > >>>> mapper without an overall consistent plan. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> All I am saying is that it will become a breaking change to globally > >>>>> define this behavior as there are nowadays several, conflicting modes > >>>>> implemented. Due to that I would like to emphasize that the flag > >>>>> introduction (“handleUpdateToo”) still seems as the solution with the > >>>>> lowest friction. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Adding a flag to an individual mapper is just a solution to your problem > >>>> and it doesn't address the wider issue. It is basically a work-around for > >>>> your use-case, and is introducing yet another behaviour on top of the > >>>> already inconsistent behaviour we have today. > >>>> > >>>> Of course we need anything new that is added to be able to match the > >>>> current behaviour, which will be more and more difficult the more random > >>>> switches and config options we have in mappers. So we really do need to > >>>> have a proper solution in thought out, then figure out how to address it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> *Frank Thiele * > >>>>> Open Source Services 2 - Product Group Customer Success Services > >>>>> (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) > >>>>> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | > >>>>> GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com > >>>>> Tel. +49 30 726112-0 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 | > >>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)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 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> *Von:* Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>>>> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 25. September 2019 08:38 > >>>>> *An:* Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>>>> *Cc:* Schuster Sebastian (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) < > >>>>> Sebastian.Schuster(a)bosch-si.com>; EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, > >>>>> INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) <external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com>; > >>>>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>>> *Betreff:* Re: [keycloak-dev] A newly added Hardcoded Role mapper > >>>>> ignores users that have already logged in before > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Adding config options on a single mappers is not really a great > >>>>> solution. We need to make sure there is a consistent approach throughout. > >>>>> We probably don't have consistent and predictable behaviour today, but I > >>>>> would rather not make it worse by introducing random config options on > >>>>> mappers. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Main question is if this should be controlled on individual mappers or > >>>>> if it should mainly be a config on the identity provider. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Having the config on the identity provider would make more sense as it > >>>>> would be simpler to configure and it would avoid corner cases. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> There's probably at least 3 different modes for identity brokering that > >>>>> should be supported: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) Import only - User is only imported if it doesn't exist. If user > >>>>> already exists nothing is updated. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) Sync - Allow changes to the user within Keycloak, but also sync > >>>>> changes from external IdP > >>>>> > >>>>> 3) External - Do not allow any changes to the user within Keycloak as > >>>>> the user should be fully managed from the external IdP > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Option 1 is trivial. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Option 2 can be very complicated. Take the example of the hardcoded role > >>>>> for instance. User first logs in, the role is added. An admin then removes > >>>>> the role from the user. User logs in again and the role is re-added. Same > >>>>> example can be applied to last name for instance. User logs in. 6 months > >>>>> later the user changes the last name in Keycloak account console, but then > >>>>> next day when they re-login the last name is changed back. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Option 3 is relatively trivial, but would need some tweaks within > >>>>> Keycloak. A user that is fully externally managed should not be able to use > >>>>> Keycloak account console and should be view-only in the admin console. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 22:21, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Makes sense to me. From me +1 for this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Marek > >>>>> > >>>>> On 20. 09. 19 15:57, Schuster Sebastian (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) wrote: > >>>>>> I guess the point was just to add a configuration flag to the mapper > >>>>> enabling the update on existing users. > >>>>>> If that flag is not there or set to false, the old behavior stays. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> Tel. +49 30 726112-485 | Mobil +49 152 02177668 | Telefax +49 30 > >>>>> 726112-100 | Sebastian.Schuster(a)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 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >>>>>> Von: keycloak-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org < > >>>>> keycloak-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; Im Auftrag von Stian Thorgersen > >>>>>> Gesendet: Freitag, 20. September 2019 15:25 > >>>>>> An: EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) < > >>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&gt; > >>>>>> Cc: keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>>>> Betreff: Re: [keycloak-dev] A newly added Hardcoded Role mapper > >>>>> ignores users that have already logged in before > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm afraid you've lost me on the last one as I'm not following ;) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 16:17, EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, > >>>>> INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) <external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&gt; wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> What if I implement a newer version of the Hardcoded Role mapper that > >>>>>>> has a (optional, as configuration migration case) flag to activate > >>>>>>> update handling. So when the flag is set to false or not set at all > >>>>>>> (migration case), then behavior is as of today. If the flag is set, > >>>>>>> the import and update functions behave the same way. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> *Frank Thiele * > >>>>>>> Open Source Services 2 - Product Group Customer Success Services > >>>>>>> (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) > >>>>>>> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | > >>>>>>> GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com Tel. +49 30 726112-0 | Fax +49 30 > >>>>>>> 726112-100 | external.Frank.Thiele(a)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 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> *Von:* Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>>>>>> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 13:51 > >>>>>>> *An:* EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) < > >>>>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&gt; > >>>>>>> *Cc:* keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>>>>> *Betreff:* Re: [keycloak-dev] A newly added Hardcoded Role mapper > >>>>>>> ignores users that have already logged in before > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If memory serves me correctly this was on purpose where the thinking 5 > >>>>>>> years ago was that users would be imported on first login, then > >>>>>>> managed from Keycloak after that. That is not always the case though > >>>>>>> and we should have some way of controlling if users updated on > >>>>>>> subsequent logins and perhaps also be able to fine-tune what is > >>>>> updated. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 13:21, EXTERNAL Thiele Frank (TNG, > >>>>>>> INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) <external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&gt; wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In our project, we use the "Hardcoded role" mapper within a configured > >>>>>>> Identity Provider (also a Keycloak instance, in our case the same but > >>>>>>> a different realm) to describe that each user logging in via Keycloak > >>>>>>> shall be given a certain role. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This works perfectly if the mapper is configured before the first > >>>>>>> login of the user. The configured role is granted to the (cloned) user > >>>>>>> when he logs in the first time via Keycloak. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But when another "Hardcoded role" mapper is added to configure another > >>>>>>> role, then the user is not given the other role when he logs in. Only > >>>>>>> new users logging in the first time get both roles assigned. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Is this on purpose or a bug? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Frank Thiele > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Open Source Services 2 - Product Group Customer Success Services > >>>>>>> (INST-CSS/BSV-OS2) Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 > >>>>>>> | > >>>>>>> 12109 Berlin | GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com<http://www.bosch-si.com< > >>>>>>> http://www.bosch-si.com%3chttp:/www.bosch-si.com>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&lt;mailto: > >>>>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com&lt;mailto: > >>>>>>> external.Frank.Thiele(a)bosch-si.com% > >>>>>>> 3cmailto:external.Frank.Thiele@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 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> keycloak-dev mailing list > >> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev > > >