Hi Malithi,
Yes, I got your concern, Please find the answers in-line
> My question is not about the config issue or it's clarity. My question is
> about the way this usecase is being achieved now and is it the way to do it.
> That's why I was repeating, "why not use claim transformation to
Hi Kanapriya,
My question is not about the config issue or it's clarity. My question is
about the way this usecase is being achieved now and is it the way to do it.
That's why I was repeating, "why not use claim transformation to resolve
the local claim (wso2 claim) here".
Also, as per the
Hi Malithi,
2. Noted, that in each authenticator an additional parameter needs to be
>> configured to denote 'userAttribute' mapping. Is this how (1) above is
>> achieved ?
>> However, the respective configurations in SMSOTP and TOTP with this
>> regard are not consistent. Moreover, I feel
Hi Kanapriya,
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Kanapriya Kuleswararajan <
kanapr...@wso2.com> wrote:
> Hi Malithi,
>
> Please find the comments in line.
>
>>
>> I was using $subject to associate federated identity over google and
>> facebook to the local user while configuring SMSOTP and TOTP
Hi Malithi,
Please find the comments in line.
>
> I was using $subject to associate federated identity over google and
> facebook to the local user while configuring SMSOTP and TOTP as the second
> factor authentication mechanism.
>
> As I noted, for this to work I had to configure the federated
Hi All,
I was using $subject to associate federated identity over google and
facebook to the local user while configuring SMSOTP and TOTP as the second
factor authentication mechanism.
As I noted, for this to work I had to configure the federated claim, as the
userAttribute in the authenticator
