Hello! We are currently in the process of migrating our Customer Portal to Keycloak, and are trying to decide which is the best OpenID Connect Flow to use, standard or implicit, based on our needs. What are example uses cases for both flows? When would you use one vs the other? Here is the general use case we are trying to solve. 1. A user logs in and receives an access_token. 1. The user loads an Angular single-page-app that makes a call to a stateless REST api, passing an access token. 2. The REST API validates the access_token and forwards the request to the downstream system e.g. a data provider, including the access token in the request. 3. The data provider reprieves the access token and validates it and returns the response to the REST service, which returns the response to the Angular app. The above flow should be able to continue anytime throughout the duration of the SSO session. So for the above flow which OpenID Connct flow would you recommend using? Standard, Implicit, or Hybrid? Standard Flow http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#CodeFlowAuth Implicit Flow http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#ImplicitFlowAuth Thank you! - Jared Sprague access.redhat.com _______________________________________________ keycloak-user mailing list keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user

Thanks for the response Bill! So it sounds like from what you're saying that the Standard flow should work fine for us since it's what the admin app uses and it's an Angular app that talks to REST API. Just out of curiosity, in what situation would implicit flow be used? Thanks! - Jared ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Burke" <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; To: keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 1:40:03 PM Subject: Re: [keycloak-user] Which OpenID Connect Flow to Use? The Keycloak admin console is a pure HTML5/Javascript/Angular application. It is a public client that uses the keycloak.js adapter. It uses the authorization code grant flow (standard). The admin console app is registered as a client under the realm with precise allowed redirect URIs. CORS is used at the REST api to additional ensure that the correct origins are communicating with it. This ensures that only the admin console can initiate authentication and that only the admin console can participate in the auth code grant flow and only the admin console (through CORS and bearer tokens) can invoke on the REST API. On 3/31/2016 1:17 PM, Jared Sprague wrote: > Hello! > We are currently in the process of migrating our Customer Portal to Keycloak, and are trying to decide which is the best OpenID Connect Flow to use, standard or implicit, based on our needs. What are example uses cases for both flows? When would you use one vs the other? > > Here is the general use case we are trying to solve. > > 1. A user logs in and receives an access_token. > 1. The user loads an Angular single-page-app that makes a call to a stateless REST api, passing an access token. > 2. The REST API validates the access_token and forwards the request to the downstream system e.g. a data provider, including the access token in the request. > 3. The data provider reprieves the access token and validates it and returns the response to the REST service, which returns the response to the Angular app. > > The above flow should be able to continue anytime throughout the duration of the SSO session. So for the above flow which OpenID Connct flow would you recommend using? Standard, Implicit, or Hybrid? > > Standard Flow > http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#CodeFlowAuth > > Implicit Flow > http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#ImplicitFlowAuth > > Thank you! > - Jared Sprague > access.redhat.com > _______________________________________________ > keycloak-user mailing list > keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user