On 1 October 2015 at 11:42, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com
<mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 01/10/15 10:59, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>
>
> On 1 October 2015 at 10:26, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 01/10/15 09:13, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>> I don't like the query param approach as it requires somehow
>> adding the query param to specify what authenticators to
>> skip. This would have to be added to applications themselves
>> and with Keycloak the whole idea is that applications
>> shouldn't have to worry about authentication semantics.
> I thing that some applications care about how was user
> authenticated :-\
>
>
> Maybe, but that's not the case in this use-case. In this case we
> simply want to use another user than the automatically logged-in
> user. So skip_auth_mech just becomes a work around/hack rather
> than a proper solution
>
>
>
> For example when application wants to reuse Kerberos
> credential from the SPNEGO authentication to call some other
> thirdparty kerberos-secured service, it needs a way to
> "force" keycloak to authenticate with Kerberos. Hence it can
> skip other authenticators and leave just Kerberos.
>
> Similar case is, when application wants to reuse Facebook
> access token - in this case application wants to enforce
> login with Facebook. For this case, we already have
> kc_idp_hint parameter, which also requires support on the
> application side . Isn't it similar to the query parameter
> skip_auth_mechanisms ?
>
>
> Those situations are much more advanced than this use-case. In
> those case you'd have to have some form of a additional
> authenticators. For example if an app needs Facebook token they
> would need the user to authenticate with Facebook whether or not
> the user is already authenticated. This becomes quite tricky,
> especially if the user is already logged-in and logs in with FB
> as another user. But, that's not what this use case is about and
> we haven't had a request for this, so no need to consider it now.
>
>
> I might be wrong, but maybe some Keycloak users don't care
> too much about SSO. The added value for them is provisioning
> of users and the fact, that they don't need to implement
> Facebook or Kerberos authentication, but Keycloak implements
> it for them. So they may want some control on the application
> side how is user authenticated.
>
>
> SSO or not, it's still the same concept of moving authentication
> semantics away from apps to the authentication server.
TBH I am still not seeing why kc_idp_hint parameter support is ok,
but skip_auth_mech is not. In both cases, it's the application
which wants to control the behaviour somehow. Skip_auth_mech can
be used to skip some mechanism, but also to enforce login with
some mechanism (skip all other mechanisms besides the one required).
I'm not a big fan of kc_idp_hint either ;)
"skip_auth_mech" would be a horrible way to enforce a specific auth
mechanism. What if you add another mechanism? What if user is already
logged-in? It's just not something that should be added without
thinking about the corner cases. Then there are also similar things
baked into OIDC to consider (acr, amr, id_token_hint, etc..).
As we have loads of things to do and skip_auth_mech is not something
that anyone has requested, except for in this use-case. Where I'm
arguing that it's a bad way to do it. We shouldn't add it now as it's
a work around/hackish solution that we haven't fully considered.
>
>> We need a generic mechanism to be able to skip any
>> authenticators that automatically log in a user. Currently
>> this is only Kerberos, but in the future we could add more,
>> including an option to automatically route to external IdPs.
> For external IdPs, we already have "Authenticate by Default"
> switch on identity providers. We also have kc_idp_hint
> parameter as I mentioned above.
>>
>> Ignoring implementation semantics for now, but taking
>> Kerberos as the example authenticator I can see some options
>> (in the example below replace 'Kerberos' with any other
>> authentication method that can automatically login a user):
>>
>> * 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
>> * 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
> +1 to support "Is this you" screen. However maybe this should
> be configurable as some deployments may not want to display
> the screen, but want to relogin automatically.
>
> Classic example is
redhat.com <
http://redhat.com>. When I
> have kerberos ticket, I can never see the login screen on
>
saml.redhat.com <
http://saml.redhat.com> . If we enforce
> adding "Is this you", some employees may complain "Hey, why
> there is another splash screen I need to click. Why I am not
> logged automatically" etc. But maybe I am wrong here. Maybe
> good opportunity to ask IT guys on the call today as they
> have experience with the real world scenarios ;-)
>
>
> I don't see why it's a problem that the splash screen is
> displayed. The user has decided to log out from the Kerberos
> session so it makes no sense whatsoever to automatically log the
> user in again. That's basically disabling the log out.
I imagine I have 10 tabs opened in my browser. I want to close the
tab with
mojo.redhat.com <
http://mojo.redhat.com> and before that,
I automatically click on "logout" . After few minutes, I want
again to do something different for example in calendar.
redhat.com <
http://redhat.com> and now I will see the splash
screen when I want to relogin.
For me, splash screen is not an issue. Not sure about all other
employees...
Maybe we can add splash screen automatically and add support for a
flag to not display splash screen just when someone requests it.
Again, I can be wrong, but I bet this request will come earlier or
later :-)
Really? I just don't see that as a problem. 99.999% of the time the
user won't see any splash screen as they will just login and that's
that. For the times when someone logs out I just can't see it being a
huge problem that they get a "is this you" prompt.
If someone is really that bothered about the splash screen let them
tell us and we can add an option, but there's no point in filling the
admin console up with all sorts of unused toggles.
Ok, I agree it's better to
add additional toggles just when someone
requests it. I just bet this request will come :-)
Marek
Marek
>
>
> Conclusion of my point of view: Add variable support for "Is
> this you" screen and in addition have the support for
> skip_auth_mechanism Michael implemented.
>
>
> If we add is this you screen, then skip_auth_mechanism is not
> required for this use case and hence we should not add it unless
> specifically requested
>
>
>
> Marek
>
>> * Implement account switcher - where a user can login to
>> multiple accounts at a time and select which account to use
>>
>> Other ideas? Points for ideas that requires no hacks in
>> applications ;)
>>
>> On 30 September 2015 at 15:39, Michael Gerber
>> <gerbermichi(a)me.com <mailto:gerbermichi@me.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to use kerberos as my standard
>> authentication mechanism, but I also want to have the
>> possibility to log in as an admin over the login form.
>> Therefore, I want to skip the kerberos authenticator
>> after a successful logout.
>>
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-1727
>>
>> How would you solve this problem?
>>
>> I've got two solutions, one sets a logout session cookie
>> after a logout and then skips the kerberos
>> authentication and another which allows users to skip
>> any kind of alternative authenticators with a query
>> parameter.
>>
>> Logout Session Cookie
>>
https://github.com/gerbermichi/keycloak/commit/f804d9e13573cb666cf6d2eff1...
>>
>> Query Param
>>
https://github.com/gerbermichi/keycloak/commit/abd3bd87f5aa4c28914da67765...
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>
>