Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 24, 2019. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 24, 2019. It is now read-only.

Proposal for Official Fork #628

@alexandre-leites

Description

@alexandre-leites

Hi,

As everyone here can see, the project is almost abandoned.

I believe someone or preferable a group of people fluent in Go lang should create an 'official' fork of the project so the community can contribute with PRs which won't be waiting forever at "Pull Requests" tab.

I'm not fluent in Go but I can help with docker images or something like that if needed.

====== Edit =====

According to @russtacular comment on 29 Aug 2018 this project is oficially discontinued. Therefore, while the community is discussing where it will be 'oficially' forked and supported, there are several projects already taking place as a migration path:

https://github.com/pusher/oauth2_proxy (see #628 (comment))
https://github.com/buzzfeed/sso
https://github.com/openshift/oauth-proxy
https://github.com/ploxiln/oauth2_proxy (see #628 (comment) and #628 (comment))

Also, there is a discussion on gofrs gofrs/help-requests#32 (comment)

Activity

eforbus

eforbus commented on Jul 11, 2018

@eforbus

Agree. I think many of us would love to see some of these PRs get merged. Like it or not this is one of the simpler to use solutions for integration of OAuth2 or OIDC providers on top of Kubernetes.

andreacassioli

andreacassioli commented on Jul 15, 2018

@andreacassioli

It is definitely a pity the project is kind of dead. Looks like a lot of people use it though. There is an interesting fork

https://github.com/openshift/oauth-proxy

but specialized on OpenShift.

If I were proficient in Go I would love to help.

Would be nice to know the maintainers opinion.

ermik

ermik commented on Jul 18, 2018

@ermik

Let's find a well-known OSS org on github that could manage having such fork. Security repos shouldn't be on any one personal account. It is important though to have @bitly's support and perhaps have their team add the official fork's releases as a tag on dockerhub.

alexandre-leites

alexandre-leites commented on Jul 19, 2018

@alexandre-leites
Author

I agree with you @ermik. Finding an OSS organization which can take care of the project and assign people (not just one) which can approve PRs and manage the repository.

bhack

bhack commented on Jul 22, 2018

@bhack

This is used quite often with K8S. /cc @cncf if it has any suggestion of what group could take care of this.

bhack

bhack commented on Jul 31, 2018

@bhack

/cc @jbeda Do you know someone that could be interested to maintain this project active in a fork?

tanuck

tanuck commented on Aug 6, 2018

@tanuck
Contributor

Have @bitly stopped using this, hence the staleness of the project? If so it would be interesting to hear what they use instead.

ermik

ermik commented on Aug 7, 2018

@ermik

Everyone at bitly might be just drones and we are a part of their simulation.

skwashd

skwashd commented on Aug 8, 2018

@skwashd

I have been in touch with people at bitly about the current state of the project. I will post another update when I have more information.

mohammed90

mohammed90 commented on Aug 8, 2018

@mohammed90

If you're going for a hard fork, consider https://github.com/gofrs .

ajcollett

ajcollett commented on Aug 23, 2018

@ajcollett

I too would like to use this! I recently started using the free Access service from CloudFlare. I really like the concept. So being able to do the same in a stable way with NGINX would be amazing...

skwashd

skwashd commented on Aug 24, 2018

@skwashd

I have exchanged emails with the CEO of @bitly. I thought we were going to get this resolved. Unfortunately once it was passed over to an engineer it died.

I think it is pretty clear that this project is no longer a priority for bitly. For whatever reason they are unwilling to pass it over to new stewards.

I propose the following actions:

  • identify a new home for the project
  • mirror the repo in new org
  • update the docs
  • review all outstanding issues/PR and duplicate them in the new project. Add comments on the bitly version with a link to the new issue
  • map out what a ???/oauth_proxy 1.0 (or 3.0) release would look like

59 remaining items

JoelSpeed

JoelSpeed commented on Jan 11, 2019

@JoelSpeed
Contributor

For those interested I have an update on the progress of the Pusher fork.

  • I have got to the stage where I am happy with the migration work (although if anyone would like to review the changes I have made please feel free Migration from Bitly to Pusher oauth2-proxy/oauth2-proxy#7)
  • Once the migration work has been merged I will create a v3.0.0 release on the Pusher fork to distinguish where the migration was made and start accepting functionality PRs no top of this release
  • I am still on the look-out to add some maintainers to the repository. For the moment all opened PRs will request the pusher/cloud-team for review but if anyone else is interested in being given review/merge permissions, please email me joel[at]pusher.com
  • I have created a new PR (Add archival notice with links to continued projects #684) to add an archival notice to this repo which notes the buzzfeed, openshift and pusher forks, this will need reviewing and hopefully merging by someone from bitly (Could @russtacular please help with this?)
  • I spoke with several members of the CNCF TOC before christmas about the project and they agree that the project could become a sandbox project with them but some work will need to be done before this can happen. In particular it will need a small amount of co-operation from Bitly so I'd like to initiate a conversation with someone from Bitly about whether they support the idea of transferring the project to the CNCF before I put any further effort into this, @russtacular could you confirm who would be best to talk to about this?
JoelSpeed

JoelSpeed commented on Jan 14, 2019

@JoelSpeed
Contributor

For interested parties, the new v3.0.0 release has now been merged and I will now start working on migrating PRs and issues over to the Pusher fork as and when I have time

https://github.com/pusher/oauth2_proxy/releases/tag/v3.0.0

adamdecaf

adamdecaf commented on Jan 14, 2019

@adamdecaf

Thanks! Did you see the v3.0.0 image has a few known vulnerable libraries or alerts? The quay page 404's for me, but maybe they're visible to you?

https://quay.io/repository/pusher/oauth2_proxy?tag=latest&tab=tags

tlawrie

tlawrie commented on Jan 15, 2019

@tlawrie

For interested parties, the new v3.0.0 release has now been merged and I will now start working on migrating PRs and issues over to the Pusher fork as and when I have time

https://github.com/pusher/oauth2_proxy/releases/tag/v3.0.0

@JoelSpeed Great work! Looking forward to switching to the Pusher version. Do you know when you will merge in the changes from your fork such as OIDC session refresh?

JoelSpeed

JoelSpeed commented on Jan 15, 2019

@JoelSpeed
Contributor

Thanks! Did you see the v3.0.0 image has a few known vulnerable libraries or alerts? The quay page 404's for me, but maybe they're visible to you?

Noted, they are also 404'ing for me so I will try and look into this, I suspect they are vulnerabilities in the debian base image we are using

@JoelSpeed Great work! Looking forward to switching to the Pusher version. Do you know when you will merge in the changes from your fork such as OIDC session refresh?

Working on that this week! See oauth2-proxy/oauth2-proxy#14

desimone

desimone commented on Jan 18, 2019

@desimone
Contributor

I recently released pomerium. Pomerium may be a good fit for new users, or those okay with significant breaking changes from oauth2_proxy.

Like oauth2_proxy, pomerium is a reverse proxy but has additional goals of supporting dynamic policy, and identity/device aware access control similar to BeyondCorp.

fnkr

fnkr commented on Jan 21, 2019

@fnkr

@desimone Hi, Pomerium looks nice, especially in terms of code quality and structure. I do miss a few features (e.g. a provider for GitLab) but would be willing to contribute them. Is there a Gitter/Slack/similar chat to discuss things?

desimone

desimone commented on Jan 21, 2019

@desimone
Contributor

@fnkr thank you for your kind words!

If you don't mind creating an issue in our repo, I'm sure we can address both adding support for GitLab and finding a good place to discuss things.

apriendeau

apriendeau commented on Jan 23, 2019

@apriendeau

Hey Everyone! There are several good forks out there. We recommend looking at them and using them! I have listed out the ones that I found in this list and will add them to the README redirecting people there.

pomerium
Ploxlin oauth2_proxy fork
Pusher oauth2_proxy fork

JoelSpeed

JoelSpeed commented on Jan 23, 2019

@JoelSpeed
Contributor

@apriendeau I already have a PR open to add a notice that this repo is archived and list maintained forks, do you have the ability to review it? #684

apriendeau

apriendeau commented on Jan 23, 2019

@apriendeau

@JoelSpeed Thanks for saving me the effort! It has been merged and I am going to lock this conversation 👍

locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators on Jan 23, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

        Participants

        @skwashd@adamdecaf@ermik@tanuck@russtacular

        Issue actions

          Proposal for Official Fork · Issue #628 · bitly/oauth2_proxy