[keycloak-dev] acr and acr_values

[Bill Burke]

We'll just be attacking authentication vector of trust.


On 2/16/17 4:31 AM, Schuster Sebastian (INST/ESY1) wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> there is an upcoming standard on Levels of Assurance at NIST https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/.
> Justin Richer blogged about it here https://medium.com/@justinsecurity/vectors-of-trust-ed52a57fe025#.c9eo8ihmx
> Maybe that's interesting in this context.
>
> Best regards,
> Sebastian
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: keycloak-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:keycloak-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org] Im Auftrag von Stian Thorgersen
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 09:21
> An: Martin Hardselius <martin.hardselius at gmail.com>
> Cc: keycloak-dev <keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Betreff: Re: [keycloak-dev] acr and acr_values
>
> Can you elaborate on your use-case?
>
> We have some plans to introduce a step-up-authentication mechanism. The main idea is to have the concept of authentication levels. In the authentication flows there would be additional metadata that would set the authentication level. This means the authentication level can be set independently to authenticators and authenticators doesn't even have to be aware of it.
>
> In summary a login flow would look something like:
>
> * Username/password form
> * Set authentication level = 1
> * OTP form
> * Set authentication level = 2
>
> Behind the covers the authentication processor would know at which point in the flow it's possible to exit the flow depending on the level requested.
> The level requested would be base on:
>
> * Realm default
> * Client default
> * Client requested
>
> It would also support the client being able to initially request for level
> 1 then later ask for level 2. The authentication processor would it that case be able to skip the parts of the flow that was previously executed.
>
> We also had an idea about allowing alternative flows depending on what level you are going from and to. This could be relevant if authenticators allow collecting more than one thing on a single form. For example there could be alternative authenticators for username-only, username+password,
> username+password+otp. This would be done by having conditions on which
> flow to select.
>
>
> On 15 February 2017 at 14:46, Martin Hardselius <martin.hardselius at gmail.com
>> wrote:
>> We're in the process of adding support for different levels of
>> assurance in our custom installation, which means that proper support
>> for acr and acr_values is becoming more of a priority. What's the
>> status on this? Can we assist with a PR?
>>
>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-3314
>>
>> This might fit better into keycloak-user, but if you already have
>> plans for acr-stuff, or planned refactorings that would affect how
>> this is implemented, I'd be happy for some advice on how to proceed
>> with a temporary solution.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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