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

Need a way to enroll SDK identities with IDP authentication #1352

Closed
ekoby opened this issue Jun 26, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Need a way to enroll SDK identities with IDP authentication #1352

ekoby opened this issue Jun 26, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@ekoby
Copy link
Member

ekoby commented Jun 26, 2023

Possibly have a stable JWT for each JWT signer with all needed information -- controller address, IDP URL, etc

@ekoby ekoby transferred this issue from openziti/edge Sep 28, 2023
@qrkourier
Copy link
Member

Sounds useful, but only for OIDC claims because x509 claims do not presume a particular protocol for submitting a CSR, so it's treated as an out-of-band concern. Both OIDC ("external JWT signer") and x509 claims use the Identity property externalId to map the signed document from an external IdP to an existing, Ziti Identity, which may or may not be "enrolled."

Suppose we implement a stable (not secret, reusable) JWT to deliver configuration to the client. In that case, we should probably avoid naming the event representing consumption of that JWT "enrollment" because enrollment today always means registering a client authentication certificate fingerprint with the Ziti Controller, whether the Edge Enrollment CA or an External CA issued that certificate.

This JWT consumption event is an authentic configuration event, not an enrollment per se.

TL;DR We should call it a "claim," or anything other than "enrollment."

@smilindave26
Copy link
Member

I'd like to include a flow where the user only needs to know a single URL, similar to what happens with BrowZer. User can be handed that URL out-of-band. When they hit it, the dance with IdP is kicked off. Distributing that info in a JWT is a fine option, but hopefully not required.

@andrewpmartinez
Copy link
Member

Also see #2324

@andrewpmartinez
Copy link
Member

Closing as a dupe of: #2324

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants