Re: [keycloak-dev] Pairwise clients and authorization services
Yes, the default implementation is using SHA-256. That makes things a bit
more complicated. In retrospect, it might have been wiser to go with
AES-128 or some other kind of encryption.
No specific reason. It was one of the suggestions in from the spec and I
suppose we failed to think of scenarios where we would wan't to resolve the
local sub.
Martin
On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 at 17:19 Pedro Igor Silva <psilva(a)redhat.com> wrote:
We did not consider subject type pairwise in authorization services,
we
need to review this ...
If we can resolve local sub from the a pairwise subject type, I think this
is the best way to go. But pairwise is using SHA26, right ?
I also noticed you are the main contributor of subject pairwise, any
specific reason why we are not using encryption ?
Regards.
Pedro Igor
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Martin Hardselius <
martin.hardselius(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems like authorization services break when using them with a pairwise
> enabled client. I've not investigated the full extent of this but long
> story short, the sub from the token is used in token validation and in
> org.keyclak.authorization.common.KeycloakIdentity for some comparisons.
>
> Steps to reproduce:
> 1. Create pairwise a client with authorization enabled
> 3. Get access token (client_credentials)
> 3, Try post a new resource_set
>
> I'm not sure what the best way to fix this is.
> 1. Re-write token validation and KeycloakIdentity to not rely on the sub
> in
> the token,
> 2. Re-write the pairwise protocol mapper to ignore service accounts (feels
> like putting make-up on a pig), or
> 3. "terminate" pairwise subs, replacing them with the internal sub, before
> further processing.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>
_______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>