I can auth my website with either ldap or by looking in db using different spring security authentication providers.
When i use the database auth, i use UserDetailsService, which correctly checks if my user is notActive and throws DisabledException correctly.
but using LdapAuthenticationProvider this does not occur. why?
spring security 2.0.1
Which LdapAuthenticator are you using? If you use BindAuthenticator it will bind as the given user, eventually the directory server should reject if the user account disabled/expired.
I haven't used LdapAuthenticationProvider myself, but if its not done automatically you can retrieve the userdetails, The UserDetails class has bunch of methods to check weather the account is enabled/locked/expired.
Related
I developed a service provider interface (SPI) for User Federation in keycloak.
When I try to login with an existing case sensitive user, keycloak converts it to lower case, so at the end, the sent username was not found in my user API.
I am using keycloak 20.0.1 version and it is deploying in a docker container.
I found this post in stackoverflow that share an anwerd relatated for this, buth I do not get solution. I replaced conf/cache-ispn.xml as it metion, buth when keycloak starts it gets the error Cache 'users' has been requested, but no matching cache configuration exists.
I realy apreciate if some one knows if there is an alternative.
Regardles.
I tried to get original input username with case sensitive in keycloak login.
I am trying to use the Keycloak AuthzClient to register resources and related permissions in a resource server.
I have a resource server "resourceserver" with authz service enabled.
Using the AuthzClient, initialized with the json file containing the resource server's client id and secret, I'm able to obtain a pat.
...
authzClient.obtainAccessToken().getToken();
ResourceRepresentation resource = new ResourceRepresentation();
resource.setName("myresource");
resource.setUris(new HashSet<>(Collections.singletonList("urn:resourceserver:resourcetype1:myresource")));
resource.setOwnerManagedAccess(true);
resource.setType("urn:resourceserver:resourcetype1");
resource.addScope("read", "write");
resource = authzClient.protection(pat).resource().create(resource);
UmaPermissionRepresentation permissionRepresentation = new UmaPermissionRepresentation();
permissionRepresentation.setName("myresourcepermissions");
permissionRepresentation.setDescription("foo");
permissionRepresentation.addRole("somerole");
UmaPermissionRepresentation result = authzClient.protection(pat).policy(resource.getId()).create(permissionRepresentation)
After executing this code, I can see, in the keycloak admin UI, that the resource has been created, and the scopes, however the policy/permission don't seem to show up.
I believe it is probably intended, as this keycloak admin UI only shows policies of types client, role, js, etc., but not "uma" which is what UmaPermissionRepresentation creates.
I can however see that policy exists in Keycloak by querying authz/protection/uma-policy with my pat.
So there is something there. Now testing it. I created a regular user and assigned it the realm role somerole. Using this user and some arbitrary public client, I'm able to get an RPT.
First getting an access token using the password grant:
grant_type=password&username=joe&password=password&client_id=somepublicclient
Then exchanging that for an RPT:
grant_type=urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:uma-ticket&audience=resourceserver
The RPT comes back and if I view its contents, I can see the authorization block giving me access to the myresource resource.
However, when I try a similar flow with a service account (to which I also granted the somerole role)using the client credentials flow to obtain the initial access token:
grant_type=client_credentials&client_id=serviceaccount1&client_secret=77c1ffa8-0ea8-420c-ad45-e1a69a03838d
I am able to obtain an RPT, but that RPT does not contain myresource in the authorization/permission block, only the Default resource.
I have been trying to understand why that is. I have also tried using the .addClient("serviceaccount1") or even .addUser("service-account-serviceaccount1") in the UmaPermissionRepresentation, but still, the policy doesn't seem to kick in and my service account does not have access to the resource.
This is using Keycloak 4.8.0.Final.
Note: using the keycloak admin client, I am able to create policies/permissions that actually make this work; but in my environment this would causes other problems because of the roles I would need to assign to the admin client (like viewing all clients to retrieve an id etc.)
I have the same problem with KeyCloak 11.0.2.
Shared resources do not end up in the permission tickets of service accounts. Service accounts are explicitly excluded in the authorization token service.
Since sharing resources with service accounts is possible, this seems inconsistent.
However, you can work around this by explicitly setting the azp claim to something other than your client_id via a protocol mapper on your client.
.
I have set the proper LDAP configuration in Sonar 5.6.6 LTS (ldap plugin v2.2.0.608) and I see in logs that the connection is established.
When I first try to login with my LDAP-login, I am able to do so, but my user has of course no permissions - that is okay.
The problem occurs, when I want to first add my user and give him i.e. sonar-administrators group. When it is set and I try to login, Sonar authenticates me not against the external system (LDAP) but uses his own data base.
I am sure it worked with Sonar 4.5 but now I cannot configure it properly.
The problem was that creation of new users adds them by default to the local database of SonarQube. To change this default behavior I found out that the REST API endpoint to create users contains the flag 'local' which defines whether the user should be considered as a local user added to the local database or he should be added as an external user authenticated again an external system like LDAP.
So final answer is to use the following REST API endpoint:
private final String CREATE_USER_API = "/api/users/create?login={login}&name={name}&local=false"
Please note the following property: local=false at the end of the string.
I am trying to configure Grafana for my organization. I was able to configure LDAP and MySQL database pretty easily but when I try to invite a new user to an org in Grafana, it always asks the user to join Grafana.
This would be an OK behavior if at that point Grafana would authenticate against LDAP. Instead, it creates a new user in its own database. This would lead to conflict with LDAP in case the user's AD passwords changes.
This works perfectly when a user had previously logged in to Grafana. An invite sent after would directly take the user to login page.
Is it possible to do the same in case the user is not already registered in Grafana? I really want to avoid saving user credentials in Grafana database.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
I am not a Grafana expert, but looking through the source code on GitHub it certainly seems that new user registration will not go through LDAP. This is obvious in the LDAP related configuration file where you see the read-only credentials needed to look up users in the LDAP directory. A read-only administrator in LDAP will not be able to create new users as this would be necessary during a registration step. The code also indicates that registration creates temporary users in the internal store.
I'm using CAS (Central Authentication Service) from Jasig in a client JSF app running on tomcat 6 server. I would like to limit the access to the app just for the users specified in my database rather than all the users which can be authenticated using that CAS service. When the user attempts to log in, I need to check if his username is also in my database's table user and if it is - allow the access to the app. Otherwise, I would like to redirect user to a page "You don't have permission to access this part of the application". So I need authorization as well. Is there a good way to authorize the users in jsf 2.0? Thanks in advance for any help/suggestions.
Sounds like you need to design a custom Authentication Handler class in CAS. In theory, your handler would extend this [1], perform all the necessary checks and database look ups and will then be able to return a signal that indicates whether or not the user could authN.
You should then reference your custom handler in the deploerConfigContext.xml file.
For displaying the message, you could either throw an exception with the proper messages code, such that the message would appear above the login form, or you could alter the spring webflow and generate a new view-state which the user would be redirected to, if they fail to get access. The first approach is much easier to implement.
Another approach would be to take advantage of the isUserInRole() method [2] using the persondir api.
[1] http://developer.jasig.org/projects/cas/cas-server-core/cas-server/cas-server-core/apidocs/org/jasig/cas/authentication/handler/support/AbstractUsernamePasswordAuthenticationHandler.html
[2] https://wiki.jasig.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=47874068