[keycloak-dev] Create "online session" from offline session

Stian Thorgersen sthorger at redhat.com
Wed Oct 3 08:16:44 EDT 2018 

I think we really need to consider if and how we add it properly. You
shouldn't be able to use any odd id token to authenticate, but rather a
special token. Further, it probably does require proper handling of
authentication levels. Or even perhaps you can authenticate for a specific
client with an id token, but when you try to use a different client you
need to provider username/password. End of the day we just need to be very
careful about adding something like this.

By the way a long time ago I actually had this in mind as a way of doing
SSO for CLIs. You simply get a special id token that serves as the sso
cookie. Never got around to think it through in depth though. Bill had some
concerns with that idea, can't remember exactly what, so he ended up doing
token exchange for kcinit (I have quite a lot of concerns around that and
token exchange though).

On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 14:00, Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com> wrote:

> Yes, I see some possible issues with it. IMO if we add it, it should
> probably not even be added in default "browser" flow, so it's more "hard"
> to have it working and just someone, who knows what he is doing, will be
> able to setup it.
>
> On the other hand, may be useful for some deployments where the
> applications are "trusted". IMO it could be fine if the security
> implications are described in the documentation.
>
> Marek
>
> On 03/10/18 09:39, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>
> I'm not quite convinced about this approach.
>
> Firstly it seems like a workaround. Offline sessions are designed for
> applications that want to have access when the user is not around. Not for
> a "permanent" log-in. I would rather consider options that allows different
> SSO session expiration depending on device type (or initiating client) for
> instance. Once you have an SSO session in the system browser on the phone
> you can use an inapp browser tab to enable SSO to all apps, or you can do
> it for individual apps by not using the system browser.
>
> Secondly authenticating with id_token_hint is scary. For example a less
> trusted application could then use the ID token to authenticate as the user
> behind the covers and have access to everything the user has access to
> rather than the limited scope that it should have.
>
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 09:11, Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 02/10/18 17:15, Niels Bertram wrote:
>> > Thanks for the response Marek. I implemented a custom authenticator
>> > before so that makes all total sense. The parts I am a bit worried
>> > about is:
>> >
>> > a) the GET implementation would require use to send the IDToken
>> > unprotected in the URL (POST is fine)
>> I see. This makes sense and we support sending POST request to the
>> initial Authentication endpoint. Maybe you can add a flag to the
>> authenticator like "Allow POST method only" to specify if it accepts
>> just POST or allow both POST and GET? Flag can be set to ON by default
>> (hence accept only POST).
>> >
>> > b) a mobile app from which we want to initiate the "sign me in and
>> > then redirect me to another website" would effectively need to
>> > whitelist every possible URL that it can redirect to.
>> >
>> > If I send a PR to latest Keycloak, any chance that can be patched into
>> > current or next version of RH-SSO?
>> Yes, once the PR is accepted, it always go to the latest Keycloak
>> upstream and latest Keycloak always "turns" after some time to RH-SSO.
>> Some details about this https://www.keycloak.org/support.html .
>>
>> Just a note that we're close to feature freeze for Keycloak 4.x (RHSSO
>> 7.3), so if you want it in RHSSO 7.3, you need to be a bit quick though
>> :) And even then no guarantee as we will need some time for PR review etc.
>>
>> Marek
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Niels
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:33 AM Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com
>> > <mailto:mposolda at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     I suggest to use the flow like this:
>> >     1) Exchange the offline token for the 3 tokens, which will include
>> >     the
>> >     triplet of (access token, id token, offline token).
>> >
>> >     2) Then you can pass the just retrieved IDToken in the
>> authentication
>> >     request in the "id_token_hint" parameter.
>> >
>> >     3) Then you will need to create Authenticator (see our
>> >     docs/quickstarts
>> >     for more details), which will be able to see if "id_token_hint"
>> >     was sent
>> >     and then verify this token and authenticate user if it was ok. You
>> >     can
>> >     probably use some existing code from IDToken introspection
>> >     endpoint. If
>> >     parameter is not used, authenticator can be just ignored during the
>> >     authentication flow.
>> >
>> >     4) As last step, you will need to add this authenticator to the
>> >     browser
>> >     authentication flow.
>> >
>> >     This will cause that if IDToken is sent, it will be able to use it
>> to
>> >     authenticate the user and hence new UserSessionModel (+cookies and
>> >     all
>> >     of this) will be properly created by Keycloak itself.
>> >
>> >     If you manage to make this working, we will be happy if you
>> >     contribute
>> >     it in the PR :) As this is described in the OIDC specification (see
>> >     https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#AuthRequest
>> >     ), but
>> >     we don't yet implement it.
>> >
>> >     If you don't want to send PR, you may implement it a bit easier and
>> >     differently in a non-OIDC standard way (EG. pass the offline_token
>> >     directly instead of IDToken in step 2).
>> >
>> >     Marek
>> >
>> >     On 02/10/18 08:24, Niels Bertram wrote:
>> >     > Hi devs,
>> >     >
>> >     > we are trying to turn an offline session back into an "online
>> >     session" for
>> >     > which we can generate cookies and send them to the clients
>> browser.
>> >     >
>> >     > I tried to create a user session with AuthenticationManager but
>> >     for some
>> >     > reason the created session is not showing up as a proper in the
>> user
>> >     > account management section. Is there anything that needs to
>> >     happen after
>> >     > this session is created to make it a normal user session?
>> >     >
>> >     > AuthenticatedClientSessionModel clientSession =
>> >     > session.sessions().createClientSession(realm, client,
>> >     offlineSession);
>> >     >
>> >     > We have a mobile app that uses offline_access to create an
>> >     "always logged"
>> >     > in experience for the app user. However when we open a
>> >     SSO-enabled website
>> >     > in the app (WebView), there is no KEYCLOAK_SESSION cookie to
>> >     allow the web
>> >     > page to initiate a successful pre-auth check.
>> >     >
>> >     > We wrote a custom resource which we call in our webview to
>> >     "redirect" the
>> >     > user to an SSO enabled site:
>> >     >
>> >     > 1. authenticate the user
>> >     >
>> >     > AuthResult auth = new
>> >     AppAuthManager().authenticateBearerToken(session)
>> >     >
>> >     > 2. load a valid userSession
>> >     >
>> >     > UserSessionModel userSession =
>> >     session.sessions().getUserSession(realm,
>> >     > token.getSessionState());
>> >     >
>> >     > 3. create the session cookies
>> >     >
>> >     > AuthenticationManager.createLoginCookie(session, realm, user,
>> >     userSession,
>> >     > ctx.getUri(), ctx.getConnection());
>> >     >
>> >     > 4. forward the user to the SSO enabled website
>> >     >
>> >     > 5. SSO enabled website would do a normal pre-auth check with
>> >     prompt=none
>> >     >
>> >     > There was a similar conversation about the "lost" session in
>> >     KEYCLOAK-4201
>> >     > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-420>, but that one did
>> >     not go as
>> >     > far as creating a new session.
>> >     >
>> >     > Anyone of you got any clever idea on how do "preload" a valid
>> >     SSO session
>> >     > into a WebView?
>> >     >
>> >     > Cheers,
>> >     > Niels
>> >     >
>> >     > PS. we are on RH-SSO 7.2.4 so roughly Keycloak 3.4.3
>> >     > _______________________________________________
>> >     > keycloak-dev mailing list
>> >     > keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto: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
>>
>
>

More information about the keycloak-dev mailing list