Based on discussion on Stian, let me reopen this topic and add a suggestion. How about "Standalone Keycloak Adapter" or just "Standalone Adapter"? On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:44 PM Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; wrote:

In thinking a new name, I tried to look hard at these things: 1. what this software actually does. 2. what makes this software desirable to a user. 3. what "adapter" has meant for keycloak in the past. I'm not the best person to answer these questions, but here's what I've dug up: 1. Accepts HTTP requests and talks with Keycloak via OIDC to see if the client it serves should treat the requests as authenticated and/or authorized. 2. It avoids the need to install a bit of Keycloak software into the users' applications. 3. According to the docs[1]: Keycloak client adapters are libraries that makes it very easy to secure applications and services with Keycloak ... our adapters easy to use and they require less boilerplate code than what is typically required by a library. #1 is what we've been focusing on with names like "proxy". The reasons such names are dissatisfying is there is nothing unique about sitting in between two endpoints and doing stuff. So, we need to look at what that "stuff" means for Keycloak. #3 in combination with #2 tells us what this "stuff" means for Keycloak. This new software is clearly not an adapter. Actually, this new software accomplishes the mission of an adapter better than adapters themselves! Following that logic, Superadapter is my main proposal for a new name. Maybe throw in OIDC (oidc-superadapter) if there's ever going to be a saml-superadapter. Alternatively, we could focus on the lack of an adapter, with names based on terms like Adapterless: - AKI: Adapterless Keycloak Integrator - KOSA: Keycloak OIDC Sans-Adapter - AKOS: Adapterless Keycloak OIDC Server - KOAF: Keycloak OIDC Adapter-Free - etc... Alex [1] https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/securing_apps/index.html#what-are-cl... Quoting Bruno Oliveira (2018-08-20 09:54:42)