[keycloak-user] Performance impact when fine-grained permissions are active

Fri Sep 21 03:22:30 EDT 2018

Other options that I see include also changing to querying ids only for making policy decisions similarly to what Pedro did in https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/pull/5576
One could also think about introducing groups for clients as well or maybe even for any Keycloak domain entity that potentially exists very often (users, clients, ...?).
It could make management a little easier and especially using permissions to control access to clients much more efficient...

Best regards,
Sebastian 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Dr.-Ing.  Sebastian Schuster

Open Source Services (INST-CSS/BSV-OS) 
Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com
Tel. +49 30 726112-485 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 | Sebastian.Schuster at bosch-si.com

Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 B 
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten Lücke; Geschäftsführung: Dr. Stefan Ferber, Michael Hahn 

-----Original Message-----
From: keycloak-user-bounces at lists.jboss.org <keycloak-user-bounces at lists.jboss.org> On Behalf Of Pedro Igor Silva
Sent: Freitag, 21. September 2018 01:18
To: Leistert Christoph (INST/ECS2) <Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com>
Cc: keycloak-user <keycloak-user at lists.jboss.org>
Subject: Re: [keycloak-user] Performance impact when fine-grained permissions are active

Hi Leister,

One of the main issues with clients is that we don't paginate results there yet. Load every single client from the database is scalable.

Regarding fine-grained permissions in admin, I think I have something that might improve response time a bit. In a nutshell, currently, we evaluate permission on a per-client basis (for every client returned from database) where the authorization API supports using callbacks that are called during decisions. That means we can improve evaluation (even without pagination) by filtering the list of clients based on decisions from the policy evaluation engine.

Will update those JIRAs once I have something more concrete to share.

Regards.
Pedro Igor

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:10 PM Leistert Christoph (INST/ECS2) < Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com> wrote:

> Currently we use Keycloak version 3.4.3, but we would like to change 
> to the latest 4.x version as soon as possible.
>
> I did the same tests with Keycloak in version 4.4.0 and it is much 
> faster, but the number of clients before the performance is getting 
> slow is still not very high and we expect much more clients in our system.
>
>
>
> Tested request: GET /<realm>/clients?viewableOnly=true
>
> Measurement: average of 20 requests with different users after 2 warm 
> up requests
>
>
>
> For 750 clients:
>
> Version 3.4.3: 14193.35 ms
>
> Version 4.4.0: 4078.1 ms
>
>
>
> For 1000 clients:
>
> Version 4.4.0:  9202.65 ms
>
>
>
> That’s right.
>
> Each client has permissions enabled and there is one role based policy 
> per client (Has role ‘manage’ of client ‘123’).
>
> This policy is used for the view and manage permission of the client.
> (Manage client ‘123’ is possible if the user has the role ‘manage’ of 
> client ‘123’)
>
>
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
>
>
> *Christoph Leistert *
> (INST/ECS2)
> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ziegelei 7 | 88090 Immenstaad | 
> GERMANY
> | www.bosch-si.com
> Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com
>
> Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 
> B
> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten Lücke; Geschäftsführung: Dr.
> Stefan Ferber, Michael Hahn
>
>
>
> *Von:* Pedro Igor Silva <psilva at redhat.com>
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 20. September 2018 16:35
> *An:* Leistert Christoph (INST/ECS2) <Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com>
> *Cc:* keycloak-user <keycloak-user at lists.jboss.org>
> *Betreff:* Re: [keycloak-user] Performance impact when fine-grained 
> permissions are active
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:05 AM Leistert Christoph (INST/ECS2) < 
> Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We are using the fine-grained permissions for clients to control which 
> group of users could query and manage which clients. Therefore, we 
> create a client role "manage" for each of our clients and define a 
> role-based policy, which includes all users that have this "manage" 
> role. This policy is then assigned to the view and manage permissions 
> of the client. The client role "manage" is assigned to the group, 
> which should manage the client.
> This perfectly works if we only have few clients in our system. If we 
> add some more (in our system after ~700 clients) we got huge 
> performance problems. E.g., the list viewable clients operation (GET 
> /<realm>/clients?viewableOnly=true ) in the context of a user, which 
> is allowed to see two of the 700 clients, takes more than 10 seconds. 
> We also facing performance issues when delete a single client by id 
> (DELETE /<realm>/clients/<id>).
> Unfortunately, I did not find any information about the limits or 
> performance tuning possibilities, when using the fine-grained 
> permissions at the documentation:
> https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/server_admin/index.html#_fine_gra
> in_permissions I found some JIRA issues related to the performance 
> tests (
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-6196) and the support for 
> having large number of clients (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-8275).
> So I created a new one to especially not forget the fine-grained
> permissions: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-8307
> So my question additional questions are:
> Did we use the fine-grained permissions in a way there are built for? 
> If not, is there any hint, how to use the fine-grained permissions 
> feature in a correct way?
> Are these performance impacts already known? If yes, are there any 
> plans to improve these issues?
>
>
>
> We had recently improved performance on keycloak authorization 
> services but not really the fine-grained permissions in admin console. 
> What is the Keycloak version you are using ?
>
>
>
> From your description, it seems that to reproduce the problem we need 
> to create clients, enable permission for each of them and define a 
> policy for any of the scope permissions (view, manage, etc), is that right ?
>
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Christoph Leistert
>
> (INST/ECS2)
> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ziegelei 7 | 88090 Immenstaad | 
> GERMANY
> | www.bosch-si.com<http://www.bosch-si.com>
> Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com<mailto:Christoph.Leistert at bosch-si.com
> >
>
> Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 
> B
> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten Lücke; Geschäftsführung: Dr.
> Stefan Ferber, Michael Hahn
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-user mailing list
> keycloak-user at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
>
>
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user