[aerogear-dev] Keycloak integration and UPS Sender

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno at abstractj.org> wrote:

> Good morning peeps,
>
> I have a problem to solve which might affect the Sender and
> all the related clients.
>
> Previously, the UPS Sender was protected by the basic authentication
> method[1], so anyone in possession of _PushApplicationID_ and
> _MasterSecret_ is able to send push messages.
>
> After the integration with Keycloak now everything under _/rest_
> is properly protect by KC which is totally correct. Our sender is under
> the same umbrella which means that now Bearer token authentication is
> required[2] and Basic authentication won't exist anymore.
>


The device (un)registration endpoints are hit by this as well
(/rest/registry/device/*).

I am wondering if it isn't it possible to keep those URLs protected via
HTTP_BASIC, or does the keycloak.js usage deny this?

On master (plain keycloak; before keycloak.js usage) we are doing an
exclude for those URLs:
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/server/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/web.xml#L46-L52


IMO if possible, keeping these 'exceptions' (or excludes) under HTTP_BASIC
would be the simplest solution, as that means none of our client SDKs
(Android, iOS, Cordova, Node.js Sender, Java-Sendet etc) would require an
update.

-Matthias





>
> The consequence of this is the basic form being presented when you try
> to send push notifications[3]. The problem didn't occur before, because
> we were just using Basic authentication[4] instead of Bearer tokens.
>
> Possible solutions:
>
> 1- After the removal of Basic authentication, move _PushApplicationID_
> and _MasterSecret to http headers like:
>
> -H "PushApplicationID: XXXXXX" -H "MasterSecret: 42"
>
> IMO it sounds correct and reasonable for me.
>
> 2. Create a role specific for the sender like _push-applications_ and
> dinamically add _PushApplicationID_ and _MasterSecret on Keycloak where:
>
> username: _PushApplicationID_
> password: _MasterSecret_
>
> The implications of this alternative is the fact of have to manage those
> credentials on the server side inclusion/exclusion/login
>
> 3. Implement another authentication provider specifically for the sender
> and Basic authentication[5]
>
> 4. Do nothing. The consequences of this alternative is to implement
> everything already done by Keycloak.js and manage session tokens by hand
> on the admin-ui.
>
> To me the first alternative seems to be more simple, but I really want
> your feedback on it, once it affects the whole project.
>
> [1] -
>
> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/6c1a0d3fedea8fb6ba918009fd8e9785779c151f/jaxrs/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/rest/sender/PushNotificationSenderEndpoint.java#L56
>
> [2] -
> https://github.com/abstractj/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/tree/keycloak.js
> [3] -
>
> http://photon.abstractj.org/AeroGear_UnifiedPush_Server_2014-06-17_10-00-09_2014-06-17_10-00-12.jpg
>
> [4] -
>
> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/server/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/web.xml#L57
>
> [5] -
> https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/tree/master/examples/providers/authentication-properties
>
> --
>
> abstractj
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140617/26d13a1c/attachment.html