Skip to content

Make client registration more flexible and provide parameter reference #1039

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

Closed
kuschzzp opened this issue Jan 11, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed
Assignees
Labels
status: duplicate A duplicate of another issue

Comments

@kuschzzp
Copy link
Contributor

image

As you can see in the figure above, the clientId and clientSecret that the registration endpoint cannot customize, along with some other information.

ClientSettings.Builder clientSettingsBuilder = ClientSettings.builder()
.requireProofKey(true)
.requireAuthorizationConsent(true);

image

Also, if I don't use breakpoints, I don't know the 13 parameters that the /connect/register endpoint can receive. I think we should add a corresponding parameter documentation.

@kuschzzp kuschzzp added the type: enhancement A general enhancement label Jan 11, 2023
@jgrandja
Copy link
Collaborator

@kuschzzp

the clientId and clientSecret that the registration endpoint cannot customize

The client metadata can be customized. The extension point for customizing client metadata before it's saved to RegisteredClientRepository is OidcClientRegistrationAuthenticationProvider.setRegisteredClientConverter().

This is currently not documented in the reference manual so I logged a new issue gh-1044. I'll close this as a duplicate.

I don't know the 13 parameters that the /connect/register endpoint can receive. I think we should add a corresponding parameter documentation.

The spec defines all available Client metadata and the supported metadata is documented in OidcClientRegistration and it's implementation of OidcClientMetadataClaimAccessor.

@jgrandja jgrandja self-assigned this Jan 16, 2023
@jgrandja jgrandja added status: duplicate A duplicate of another issue and removed type: enhancement A general enhancement labels Jan 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: duplicate A duplicate of another issue
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants