How to make exceptions for url securing app with Keycloak? - wildfly

We have an app on Wildfly Server, secured with keycloak, everything works fine, but now we have to make an access for an app, deployed on the same server. I don't want to write a "complex" code with all certificates for https and OAuth2, we use for it, but I would like to grant an access for the second app from localhost, to make request on the first one (via rest-api) and get an response. When I check with curl from terminal of the server - I get also an Unathorized-Error, so I need to do all the same operations as for public access (take Token for access from OAuth provider). How could I set up Keycloak, to grant an access from localhost, for example. I haven't found smth. equal neither in Keycloak nor in standalone-full.xml (there are no any properties for this), where I could put exclusions.
I appreciate your help!

Add localhost to Valid Redirect Uris and Web Origins of Keycloak's client or you can simply use * for development purposes so that all Uris are valid.

Related

Keycloak API, encrypt data

I'm creating my own web and i'm using Keycloas as IDP. When I create users from my website, I send a curl to Keycloak, like when the user logs in my web site. My doubt is, if I open the browser inspector (with F12), I can see the credentials I'm sending by Curl. I think it's not secure so I'm looking for encrypt that data but I don't find how.
Thanks
Edit: I am using https through ingress because I have keycloak on kubernetes

OAuth2.0 Auth Server and IAM

I'm building a microservice based REST API and a native SPA Web Frontend for an application.
The API should be protected using OAuth2.0 to allow for other clients in the future. It should use the Authorization Code Flow ideally with Proof Key for Code Exchange (PKCE)
As I understand it I need to run my own OAuth Auth Server that's managing the API Clients and generating access tokens, etc.
Also I need my own Authentication/IAM service with it's own fronted for user login and client authorization granting. This service is the place the users login credentials are ultimately checked against a backend. That last part should be flexible and the backend might be an LDAP server in some private cloud deployment.
These components (Auth Server and IAM servicve) are outside of the OAuth scope but appear, correct me if I'm wrong, to be required if I'm running my own API for my own users.
However creating these services myself appears to be more work than I appreciate besides the obvious security risks involved.
I read about auth0 and okta but I'm not sure if they are suited for my use case with the application potentially deployed in private cloud.
I also thought about running Hydra (OAuth Server) and Kratos (IAM) by ory but I'm not sure if this is adding too many dependencys to my project.
Isn't there an easy way to secure an API with OAuth that deals with the Auth Server and the IAM that's good for small projects?!

OAuth2 redirect URI for enterprise application

I'm working on an enterprise application and our UI is a web application. We are looking to add OAuth2 support and I don't understand what to provide for the redirect URI field to the OAuth provider.
For example, I have registered my app in github OAuth provider.
Homepage URL: https://localhost:7980/index.html
Authorization callback URL: https://localhost:7980/oauth_callback
Now this works fine with localhost as the hostname. But, when this application gets used by the customers they can install it on any of their boxes and invoke the web app from any device connected to our server via https://[hostname]:7980/index.html. In this case, if the customer wants to use OAuth2 authentication option, then I don't understand what should be the redirect URL. Obviously I cannot use localhost for redirect URL as the customer can access the web app from any machine. I wouldn't know the machine ip/hostname where the customers are going to be installing our server beforehand.
One suggestion was to use a server from our company which would handle redirect URLs for the OAuth2 authentication. Is this a good idea? Is there a standard way for handling the use case I have narrated above in OAuth2?

keycloak bearer-only clients: why do they exist?

I am trying to wrap my head around the concept of bearer-only clients in Keycloak.
I understand the concept of public vs confidential and the concept of service accounts and the grant_type=client_credentials stuff. But with bearer-only, I'm stuck.
Googling only reveals fragments of discussions saying:
You cannot obtain a token from keycloak with a bearer-only client.
The docs are unclear as well. All they say is:
Bearer-only access type means that the application only allows bearer token requests.
Ok, if my app only allows bearer token requests, how do I obtain this token if I cannot get it from Keycloak using client id / client secret?
And if you can't obtain a token, what can you at all? Why do these clients exist? Can somebody please provide an example of using this type of client?
Bearer-only access type meaning
Bearer-only access type means that the application only allows bearer
token requests. If this is turned on, this application cannot
participate in browser logins.
So if you select your client as bearer-only then in that case keycloak adapter will not attempt to authenticate users, but only verify bearer tokens. That why keycloak documentation also mentioned bearer-only application will not allow the login from browser.
And if you can't obtain a token, what can you at all? Why do these clients exist?
Your client can't be set as bearer-only on Keycloak Server. You can
still use bearer-only on the adapter configuration though. Keycloak
doesn't allow "bearer only" clients (when setting up your client on
the server) to obtain tokens from the server. Try to change your
client to "confidential" on the server and set bearer-only on your
adapter configuration (keycloak.json).
So if you understand above statement then if you have two microservice which are talking to each other in the case, caller will be confidential and callee will be bearer-only
And Keycloak also mentioned
Bearer only client are web service that never initiate a login .It’s typically used for securing the back-end.
So if you want to use any adapter you can use bearer-only depend on the need
EDIT-
Lets go in more details ..Let see one example i have a web-app and one rest-api for web-app i am using React/Angular/JSF any front end technology and for back-end i am using Java based rest-api OR Nodejs.
Now for above requirement i have to secure both the products(web-app,rest-api) so what will be my work of action? How will I secure both the apps through Keycloak?
So here is details explanation
I have to create two client inside a realm in keycloak
Client A will be use by web-app
Client B will be used by rest-api
So now question will be why two client?
For web-app we want to force user to login via GUI then only generate the token
For rest-api we dont want GUI based api as these api consume by web-app but still secure the access to rest-api.
Now Go to Client A and make its Access Type public client so web-app will ask to login via keycloak GUI or your login page then generate the token
So same token which generated in above step used by rest-api and according to user role and other information data will fetch. So Access Type of Client B will be bearer-only so web-app generated token is passed to rest-api and it is then used to authorize the user .
Hope it will help. Someone want to add more he/she free to add.
Short answer: you can't obtain an access token using a bearer-only client, so authentication flow configuration is irrelevant, but keycloak may still need to know such a bearer only client to manage role / or audience
More details
bearer-only clients usefully represents back-end applications, like web service, called by front application and secured by the authorization server (= keycloak)
Backend / Web service application are not called directly by user, so they can't play in the Oauth2.0 user interactive flow. Setting "bearer-only" document this fact to keycloak server, allowing administrator to configure client without otherwise mandatory values (example redirect uri…) and allowing usefull error messages if someone trying to obtain a token for such a client
However, this doesn't mean you cannot configure specific roles for this client: so it need to appear in keycloak realm.
In addition bearer-only client need to verify the received access token, especially, if this (recommenden) adapter feature "verify-token-audience" is activated, bearer-only client need to verify that the access token has been issued for it: the bearer-only client must be in the audience attribute of the access token:
see https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/server_admin/index.html#_audience
for audience managing by keycloak, bearer-only clients needs to be registered in keycloak realm.
In my understanding, it is used when you have some internal service.
Let's say you have ServiceA and ServiceB. A user calls ServiceA which in hand calls ServiceB. ServiceB is never called by the user directly, only by other services. ServiceA will get a token using the user's credentials. And then will use this token to call ServiceB. ServiceB will never initiate a login. It will just use the token to verify permissions.
In this case, ServiceA will be confidential and ServiceB will be bearer-only clients.
An other idea why bearer only clients exist could be that client are misused for role containers sometimes, see the following discussion on the Keycloak User mailing list https://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-user/2016-April/005731.html
E. g. the default client "realm-management" is a bearer only client, that contains roles to manage things in a realm. There is no need to invoke a login on a client like this, so public and confidential doesn't make any sense.

Need to provide both Basic Authorization and SSO on Bluemix Liberty server

I have a Java app running under Websphere Liberty on IBM Bluemix. I need to be able to authenticate users 3 different ways - Basic Auth, SAML SSO, and OpenAuth SSO, in that order.
I can set up the app to do Basic Auth (using custom code) or SAML SSO (using the Bluemix Single Sign On service), but can't figure out a way to configure it to handle both at once. (I haven't even looked into how to do OpenAuth yet.) If I configure the app to use the Bluemix SSO service, then my app never sees the incoming requests to check for a userid and password to try Basic Auth before the SSO service grabs it.
I tried changing the redirect URL in the SSO service to an endpoint inside my app, but then all I get is
CWOAU0062E: The OAuth service provider could not redirect the request because the redirect URI was not valid. Contact your system administrator to resolve the problem.
I can't be the only one that needs to do this. Can anyone tell me how they did it?