The other adapters support the concept of Multi Tenancy[0]:
“That one single target application (WAR) can be secured by a single (or clustered)
Keycloak server, authenticating its users against different realms. In practice, this
means that one application needs to use different keycloak.json files"
[0]:
Scott Rossillo
Smartling | Senior Software Engineer
srossillo(a)smartling.com
<
On Sep 28, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Andrzej Goławski
<andipansa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Sorry if it is a stupid question, but what do you mean by multi-tenant in this case?
2015-09-28 23:56 GMT+02:00 Scott Rossillo <srossillo(a)smartling.com
<mailto:srossillo@smartling.com>>:
This could be done if the constructor argument is a Spring Resource[0] instead of a
string. It doesn’t help with multi-tenant support but it’s still an improvement.
[0]
http://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/3.2.x/javadoc-api/org/springf...
<
http://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/3.2.x/javadoc-api/org/springf...
Scott Rossillo
Smartling | Senior Software Engineer
srossillo(a)smartling.com <mailto:srossillo@smartling.com>
<
https://app.sigstr.com/uc/55e5d41c6533390d03580000>
<
http://www.sigstr.com/>
> On Sep 28, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Andrzej Goławski <andipansa(a)gmail.com
<mailto:andipansa@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Why not do it via contructor:
>
> public AdapterDeploymentContextBean(String configFile){
> .....
> }
>
> and in BasicKeycloakWebSecurityConfigurationAdapter add:
>
> @Value("${keycloak.configFile:WEB-INF/keycloak.json}")
> private String keycloakConfigFile;
>
> @Bean
> protected AdapterDeploymentContextBean adapterDeploymentContextBean() {
> return new AdapterDeploymentContextBean(keycloakConfigFile);
> }
>
> Best Regards,
> Andrzej
>
>
>
> 2015-09-28 22:51 GMT+02:00 Scott Rossillo <srossillo(a)smartling.com
<mailto:srossillo@smartling.com>>:
>
> Based on the other feedback and the Spring way of providing as many configuration
options as possible, I think we should refactor AdapterDeploymentContextBean.
>
> However, I rather like the way Spring that divides behavior up into an interface and
multiple implementations. I think we should:
>
> 1. Refactor the current AdapterDeploymentContextBean to be an interface and maybe
rename it AdapterDeploymentContextFactory.
> 2. Split the current implementation into:
> a. ClasspathAdapterDeploymentContextFactory > loads from class path
> b. WebApplicationAdapterDeploymentContextFactory > loads from WEB-INF
> c. JndiAdapterDeploymentContextFactory > load from JNDI
> 3. The above implementations should extend AbtractAdapterDeploymentContextFactory
with something like:
>
>
> protected loadKeycloakDeployment(Resource resource) {
> return KeycloakDeploymentBuilder.build(resource.getInputStream());
> }
>
> That would allow anyone to provide a custom AdapterDeploymentContextFactory to load
the keycloak.json from “anywhere."
>
> What do you think? Since we’re refactoring, I’d also like to take into account design
multi-tentant support. I think this approach is flexible enough to add that in the
future.
>
> If we agree this is a good approach you want to take a stab at it Thomas or should
I?
>
> Best,
> Scott
>
>
> Scott Rossillo
> Smartling | Senior Software Engineer
> srossillo(a)smartling.com <mailto:srossillo@smartling.com>
>
> <
https://app.sigstr.com/uc/55e5d41c6533390d03580000>
> <
http://www.sigstr.com/>
>> On Sep 25, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Thomas Raehalme <thomas.raehalme(a)aitiofinland.com
<mailto:thomas.raehalme@aitiofinland.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> We have written a custom subclass of
org.keycloak.adapters.springsecurity.AdapterDeploymentContextBean to enable custom
location for keycloak.json. The use of custom location is optional and defaults to the
standard /WEB-INF/keycloak.json.
>>
>> Our use case is that for developers we have a default keycloak.json included in
the application. In production, however, we override the default by using a file that is
external to the application. The location of the file is specified in JNDI settings and
injected to our subclass with the help of Spring.
>>
>> What do you think would such an extension to AdapterDeploymentContextBean be of
general use? I'd be happy to merge our subclass to AdapterDeploymentContextBean and
submit a pull request.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Thomas
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
<
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
<
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>