Hi,

Thanks for the explanations.

I'll use the MessageFactory in the gateway-provider-security-pac4j and
log4j for all pac4j components.

Best regards,
Jérôme


2015-11-13 15:51 GMT+01:00 Kevin Minder <[email protected]>:

> I’ll add a bit to the logging answer.  I created that for several reasons.
> 1) Localization as Larry mentions.
> 2) It abstract from actual logging provider and you can see for example
> gateway-i18n-logging-sl4j as an alternate integration.
> 3) Another important aspect is centralization.  It centralizes all aspects
> of a given message.  For example the level for a given message is kept with
> the message to hopefully prevent the message from being duplicated with
> potentially different levels.  It is also intended to support the notion of
> Ids and potentially cause/action annotations which are very common as
> products mature.
> 4) Lastly and possibly the most interesting/important from a developer
> perspective is traceability.  Once you find the log method for a given
> message you can use the IDE to find all of the palaces where a given
> message is used.  You can also have the IDE tell you if the message isn’t
> used anymore.
>
> All that being said the external components we integrate with certainly
> don’t use it.  So from that perspective, direct use of log4j if that is
> your choice isn’t going to cause any major problems.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 11/13/15, 8:40 AM, "larry mccay" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Hi Jérôme -
> >
> >Great questions and I'm so glad that you are here to ask them.
> >
> >I think that the set of documentation that I am working on for a KnoxSSO
> >integration guide will probably answer most of your questions.
> >I need to spend a bit more time thinking about the some of it so that I
> can
> >incorporate that information as well.
> >
> >The cookie approach is what we use in KnoxSSO. Cookies obviously have some
> >disadvantages but is probably the best alternative for KnoxSSO.
> >Something that we need to consider is that KnoxSSO is already keeping
> track
> >of the original URL for redirecting back to the requested resource.
> >We have to reconcile whether that is separate from the callback needs or
> >actually the same thing.
> >Having a little trouble wrapping my head around it right now - must have
> >more coffee. :)
> >
> >The Messages layer allows for the localization of the actual messages by
> >decoupling the messages from the actual runtime code.
> >
> >I will try and get some docs published as quickly as possible for KnoxSSO
> >integration.
> >
> >thanks,
> >
> >--larry
> >
> >On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 1) Webflow: I think I get the idea with the KnoxSSO service: how can I
> test
> >> everything to ensure pac4j works correctly with it and will be usable in
> >> Hadoop UIs?
> >>
> >>
> >> 2) Callback url:
> >>
> >> For indirect clients, pac4j is designed to be called on any url, to save
> >> it, to call the identity provider providing a static callback url, to be
> >> called back on this static callback url and to restore the originally
> >> requested url.
> >>
> >> From point 1), I conclude that pac4j will always be used with the
> KnoxSSO
> >> service (for indirect clients): will KnoxSSO call the pac4j provider
> always
> >> on the same url? Can you describe your first flow with urls?
> >>
> >> Because in that case, I could find a solution where I check for the
> >> client_name parameter to define if it's a callback or a first call.
> >>
> >> Otherwise, I will need a specific pac4j service.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3) Configuration: no problem here, I will use the AliasService.
> >>
> >>
> >> 4) Web session: I really need to put some information in session and
> check
> >> them on callback: I think I can take the data put in session, save them
> in
> >> a cookie and restore them before the callback.
> >>
> >> Is it the recommended solution? Can I re-use the components available
> for
> >> JWT tokens and cookies? And how?
> >>
> >>
> >> 5) Logs: I see in every descriptor the use of Messages and
> MessagesFactory:
> >> I can't use log4j directly, can I? What's the expected benefits using
> this
> >> Messages layer?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >> Best regards,
> >> Jérôme
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2015-11-12 18:14 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
> >>
> >> > Terrific!
> >> >
> >> > Okay... original questions:
> >> >
> >> > 1) Webflow: is it normal to get a redirection to Facebook or another
> IdP
> >> > when I made the request (for such a configuration of course)? Is this
> >> > request meant to happen in a browser? (because it's the use case it
> was
> >> > made for)
> >> >
> >> > It is normal.
> >> > The usecases in which this mechanism would be used would involve the
> >> > KnoxSSO service/feature.
> >> > What we are doing with that is providing a normalization of
> >> authentication
> >> > mechanisms by federating each auth event through a JWT token that gets
> >> set
> >> > as a cookie.
> >> > These usecases allow us to provide WebSSO flows for Hadoop UIs and
> other
> >> > applications and those applications to only ever have to know about
> >> KnoxSSO
> >> > tokens.
> >> >
> >> > What is slightly less normal is that the flow needs to have KnoxSSO in
> >> the
> >> > middle.
> >> > For instance:
> >> > 1. a browser requests a resource from a KnoxSSO participating service
> >> > provider
> >> > 2. the service provider redirects the browser to KnoxSSO since there
> is
> >> no
> >> > cookie
> >> > 3. KnoxSSO is protected with pac4j provider and redirects the browser
> to
> >> FB
> >> > 4. user authenticates to FB
> >> > 5. pac4j accepts the FB authentication and normalizes the security
> >> context
> >> > to a J2E Subject
> >> > 6. WebSSO service then creates a signed JWT token, sets the cookie and
> >> > redirects to the originally requested resource
> >> > 7. originally requested resource finds the hadoop-jwt cookie,
> validates
> >> the
> >> > token and verifies the signature and grants access to the resource
> >> >
> >> > 2) Callback url: https://localhost:8443/gateway/sandbox/callback
> >> currently
> >> > returns a 404, so I must declare this url somewhere to be taken into
> >> > account and pass to the pac4j filter. It would be even better if it
> could
> >> > be done by the pac4j deployment contributor.
> >> >
> >> > How and where to do that?
> >> >
> >> > This is an interesting question and one that may have multiple
> solutions:
> >> >
> >> > * we may be able to add the callback filter as part of the original
> >> > provider and just point them to the same URL. This would require the
> >> > ability to chain them where one knows to not handle a request that is
> >> > really meant for the other.
> >> > * If we truly need a separate URL the way you depict it there then we
> >> will
> >> > need to add a new service which would be unfortunate because it
> couples
> >> the
> >> > use of a certain provider to the use of a particular service.
> >> >
> >> > 3) Configuration
> >> >
> >> > Currently, I hardcoded a FacebookClient for Facebook authentication,
> but
> >> we
> >> > should be able to pass the appropriate client like Facebook or SAML.
> >> > Basically, we could do that using filter properties: facebook.key +
> >> > facebook.secret means we use Facebook authentication with the
> appropriate
> >> > key and secret for example. Any recommendation?
> >> >
> >> > This is fine. You will add your properties to the provider properties
> in
> >> > the topology for the pac4j provider.
> >> > You can find example code in the article to blindly add all
> properties to
> >> > the filter init params.
> >> >
> >> > Incidentally, the storage of credentials directly in config files
> should
> >> be
> >> > avoided.
> >> > See the use of the AliasService where such credentials can be
> persisted
> >> in
> >> > a credential store and resolved at runtime.
> >> > I will find examples of this for you - we can go forward with config
> >> based
> >> > values but will need to fix that later.
> >> >
> >> > 4) Web session: I seem to be able to use the web session to sore data.
> >> > Can you confirm that point?
> >> >
> >> > This is probably not going to work.
> >> > Keep in mind that there may be a cluster of Knox instances running and
> >> the
> >> > session is not replicated across all instances.
> >> > Additionally, keep in mind that your provider will only be engaged on
> the
> >> > first request to KnoxSSO and then not until the token/cookie expires.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
>

Reply via email to