Google Patents WO2023062063A1 - Refractory anchor(s), systems and methods of use So if, for example, an admin requests the "write" scope, they will get the "r_write" role in the token, but if a normal user requests the "write" scope, they won't get the "r_write" role in their token (but also no error, they are just silently excluded).WO2023062063A1 - Refractory anchor(s), systems and methods of use Now, when requesting a token for that client, users will by default have no roles, but when they request the created scopes, the token will get the roles associated with that scope, that are already assigned to that user. In the client you can now add that scope to the list of Client scopes and set the Assigned type for it as Optional. After saving it, add the wanted roles under Scope. Include in token scope is needed for refresh_tokens, if they are used. Optionally disable Display on consent screen. Give it a Name, leave Type as None and Protocol as OpenID Connect. Now create the Client scopes which should be used to request the roles (for example "read"). If you now request a token for that client, the list of roles should be empty.
#Keying in scopebox full
Inside that client, disable that all roles are included in the tokens by default ( Client -> Client scopes -> -dedicated -> Scope -> disable Full scope allowed). I solved it the following way:Ĭreate a new Client, for example called "API". I had a similar requirement for one of my project. an admin can not login with user rights Dismiss the idea of "rights as requested at login" and just look at the user roles.
Take a look into writing my own mapper that resolves scopes to roles (see if that's even possible by using public APIs and without compromising on performance). Just try to make a 1:1 mapping of roles to scopes and use the applied scopes for authorization (see if that is practical). The assigned roles set there only control which role is required so that the scope can be applied/added to the scope claim of the access token. Instead it currently also contains the “r_write” role.Īfter some more digging I think I was mislead by the documentation of the "Scope"-Tab in the "Client Scopes" detail-Configuration (or misunderstood it): Scope mappings allow you to restrict which user role mappings are included within the access token requested by the client. When the user logs in with the “read” scope requested I would expect that the “roles” array in the generated access token only contains the “r_read” role. We have the following scope-role-mappings:Īnd a user with the roles “r_read” and “r_write”. Is it possible to have a “roles” claim in generated tokens that only contains the roles that can be resolved from the requested scopes?. So far it’s all possible except that the interesting “roles” claim in generated access tokens contains all roles of the user and not only the roles that are assigned to the requested scopes. Expect the value of the relevant “roles” claim in the generated access token to equal the roles assigned to the scopes that have been requested at login. Add the effective roles to the generated access tokens using the builtin “roles” scope (with its mapper) as default for the client. Add the scopes as optional scopes to my application/client in Keycloak. For that I need the roles to apply for a session to be contained in generated access tokens. I am currently experimenting with Keycloak as OICD/OAuth provider and planned to use it for authorization based on roles in my application.
0 kommentar(er)
