Skip to content
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

Microsoft Entra ID support for appid url parameter #415

Closed
marcowartmann opened this issue Feb 28, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

Microsoft Entra ID support for appid url parameter #415

marcowartmann opened this issue Feb 28, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@marcowartmann
Copy link

marcowartmann commented Feb 28, 2024

OIDC is not working when Entra ID "App Registration" is configured with custom APIs.

The issue occurs cause of well-known openid-configuration and jwks uri must use an added parameter in the URL with appid speficified

Well known openid configuration:
https://login.microsoft.com/<tenant-id>/discovery/v2.0/.well-known/openid-configuration?appid=<app-id>

jwks uri:
https://login.microsoft.com/<tenant-id>/discovery/v2.0/keys?appid=<app-id>

@ericchiang
Copy link
Collaborator

See the thread last time this came up:

#215 (comment)

General trying to figure out Azure support is #344

OpenID discovery spec that covers forming the well-known path is https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-discovery-1_0.html#ProviderConfig, which doesn't mention a strategy for URL paramaters

OpenID Providers supporting Discovery MUST make a JSON document available at the path formed by concatenating the string /.well-known/openid-configuration to the Issuer.

I don't think I want to make any changes to the library without figuring out a strategy for Azure (#344).

You may want to take a look at https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/coreos/go-oidc/v3/oidc#ProviderConfig, which was added explicitly for these kinds of issues where users need to work with providers with non-standard discovery.

Probably going to close this one out?

@ericchiang
Copy link
Collaborator

Ah yeah, this is a dupe of #290

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants