8:38 a.m.
Although unifying all of this is probably very elegant from a code perspective, I agree
with Pedro. For me scopes and roles are two different concepts. Scopes being mainly for
the external client/user view. Especially when you look into the direction of GDPR or UMA
2.0 client scopes, they could be a means to describe privacy-relevant information (e.g.
what kind of data, the purpose of accessing it, associated descriptions). Latest at that
point, still calling this role and managing it the same way as roles will probably be very
confusing...
Best regards,
Sebastian
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
Dr.-Ing. Sebastian Schuster
Engineering and Support (INST/ESY1)
Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | GERMANY |
www.bosch-si.com
Tel. +49 30 726112-485 | Fax +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.-Ing. Rainer
Kallenbach, Michael Hahn
-----Original Message-----
From: keycloak-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:keycloak-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org]
On Behalf Of Pedro Igor Silva
Sent: Donnerstag, 28. September 2017 14:53
To: Thorgersen, Stian <stian(a)redhat.com>
Cc: keycloak-dev <keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] rename client templates to scope?
I think all these concepts under a single umbrella is confusing.
Regarding roles and scopes ....
IMO, roles and scopes are separated things. It would be nice if we had a specific area for
Scope Mapping, where from there I could create scopes and manage their configuration
(consent, param required, etc), associate scopes with roles (and not turn roles into
scopes) and associate mappers with scopes.
And also push scopes into a separated claim within tokens.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Stian Thorgersen <sthorger(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
Interesting. So client templates could become a very flexible thing
that covers many uses. So one single concept could cover:
* Templates as today
* Scope
* Namespaces
I like the idea, but the devil is in the details. How would it end up
looking. Would it be easy to use.
On 27 September 2017 at 19:38, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Maybe want to allow client scopes to define their own roles too.
> Then we have a role namespace as well. Could even think about
> removing realm roles if we do this.
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Stian Thorgersen
> <sthorger(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > Interesting idea. That might just work and be a nice and easy way
> > to
add
> > proper support for OAuth/OIDC scope.
> >
> > On 25 September 2017 at 17:11, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> This is something for 4.0
> >>
> >> Was thinking that we should rename Client Templates to Client Scopes.
> >> For oauth, oidc, and token exchange client asks for a specific
> >> scope with the "scope" parameter. This "scope"
parameter would
> >> be the name of a client-id or a client scope (formerly client
> >> emplates. Clients will be granted access to scopes in the admin
> >> console. Probably through authz services.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bill Burke
> >> Red Hat
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> keycloak-dev mailing list
> >> keycloak-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> Red Hat
>
_______________________________________________
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