[keycloak-dev] Thoughts on Keycloak CLI

[Stan Silvert]

On 5/19/2015 9:27 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
> FWIW, I agree with Stian on #2.   Why wouldn't you just use the REST
> interface in that case?  IMO, JBoss CLI suffers from serious usability
> issues.  Kinda sucks we have to build on top of it.
I agree too.  #1 is better.  But #2 makes it easier to "just use the 
REST interface".
>
> BTW, doesn't an admin password recovery scare you a little bit?
You mean not having it is scary?
> Shouldn't this be an operation that can only run in offline mode
> directly on the machine keycloak is installed?  Import/export falls into
> this catagory too.
Yes.  I think we all agree on that.
>
> On 5/19/2015 9:05 AM, Stan Silvert wrote:
>> On 5/19/2015 8:41 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>>>>>> The first priority for CLI is to have support to reset admin password and
>>>>>> to do import/export, not the admin endpoints.
>>>>> Is reset admin password not allowed from the REST API?
>>>>>> We also need to make sure we can authenticate properly using Keycloak.
>>>>> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Can you elaborate?
>>>> Adding operations from admin endpoints (create/update realm, create/update
>>>> users, etc.) isn't the highest priority. What we do need is:
>>>>
>>>> * Recover admin password - if a user looses the admin password there's no
>>>> easy way to recover access other than manually editing the database
>> Indeed.  That does sound like a high priority.   I take it there is no
>> existing API for that?
>>>> * Make it easier to run import/export and allow running it offline
>> Sounds doable.
>>>> As we're using JBoss CLI, which now has an offline mode, that's the perfect
>>>> place to add those operations.
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "Stan Silvert" <ssilvert at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 18 May, 2015 8:38:40 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Thoughts on Keycloak CLI
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, I've got some down time waiting on Elytron, so I've decided to do a
>>>>>>> quickie implementation of #2 to see how it goes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/15/2015 8:36 AM, Stan Silvert wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been giving some thought to the Keycloak integration with WildFly
>>>>>>> CLI.
>>>>>>> There are two designs. Both involve a subsystem called "kcrest" with a
>>>>>>> resource called "server". You can define a server to talk to using these
>>>>>>> three attributes:
>>>>>>> base-url ( value is something like
>>>>>>> http://localhost:8080/auth/admin/realms
>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>> username
>>>>>>> password
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> username and password are optional. If you don't mind having these
>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>> stored in standalone.xml/domain.xml you can specify them. That way, you
>>>>>>> don't have to include them with each request.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Design #1: Implement all of the Keycloak REST API in CLI
>>>>>>> We build out resources for each REST path and put them in the management
>>>>>>> model. Then build out operations for everything. So a CLI session to
>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>> a client called "myclient" might look like this:
>>>>>>> cd /subsystem=kcrest/server=foo
>>>>>>> cd realm=myrealm
>>>>>>> clients=myclient:add(enabled=true)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Design #2: Create a single generic operation that closely mimics the
>>>>>>> REST
>>>>>>> API
>>>>>>> cd /subsystem=kcrest/server=foo
>>>>>>> :submit(method=POST,
>>>>>>> path=/myrealm/clients,params={"clientId"=>"myclient","enabled"=>"true"})
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Advantages of Design #1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         * Looks and behaves just like other CLI resources
>>>>>>>         * Uses standard CLI operations
>>>>>>>         * Each resource and operation can contain help text
>>>>>>>         * Everything can be navigated from CLI command line or CLI GUI
>>>>>>>         tree,
>>>>>>>         making it easy to browse the model
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Disadvantages of Design #1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         * It might take a very long time to implement (2-3 months?)
>>>>>>>         * Ongoing maintenance. Every time REST API changes, you have to
>>>>>>>         update
>>>>>>>         subsystem code
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Advantages of Design #2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         * Quick to implement (2-3 weeks)
>>>>>>>         * Always works despite REST API changes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Disadvantages of Design #2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         * :submit operations get long and ugly
>>>>>>>         * Can't specify help text for each resource
>>>>>>>         * Hard to browse the model. Need to submit "list" style REST
>>>>>>>         invocations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that it might be possible to auto-generate Design #1. If so, it
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> the best of both worlds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whoever implements this should probably start with Design #2 and then
>>>>>>> spend
>>>>>>> some time researching auto-generation of Design #1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> keycloak-dev mailing list keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>>>> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> keycloak-dev mailing list
>> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>>