Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Core: Assume issued_token_type is access_token to fully comply with RFC 6749 #10314
Core: Assume issued_token_type is access_token to fully comply with RFC 6749 #10314
Changes from 2 commits
e4cf801
46f2aa1
1a42e58
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@adutra do you maybe know if Keycloak fully supports RFC 8693? The token exchange follows https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8693#name-successful-response, where
issued_token_type
isrequired
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found keycloak/keycloak#26502, which states unfortunately that Keycloak deviates from the standard.
I can see that we might add the null check as a workaround for such cases where the auth server doesn't send back an
issued_token_type
but I'd like to first see what other people in the community think about this.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed, Keycloak does not fully implement it. Quoting from their Securing Applications and Services Guide:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But the problem here is wider:
issued_token_type
is only defined for the token exchange flow (RFC 8693). This field does not exist for standard flows from RFC 6749. So the following scenario can happen even with fully-compliant servers:client_credentials
to authenticate initially;issued_token_type
, which is normal since it's not defined for this flow.subjectTokenType
is null.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@nastra also see this comment which gives some context on why we have the problem today: #4771 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would probably leave this as-is, since
issued_token_type
is required according to RFC 8693There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't agree: this flow is not governed by RFC 8693, this is RFC 6749 section 4.4.