Skip to content

use the applications rest template for the autoconfigured jwks receiver #20747

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

Conversation

m-kay
Copy link
Contributor

@m-kay m-kay commented Mar 31, 2020

If an application has a configured rest template (e.g. with a proxy configuration) the JwtDecoder auto configuration should use the applications rest template.

@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues added the status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged label Mar 31, 2020
@m-kay m-kay changed the base branch from master to 2.2.x March 31, 2020 13:32
@m-kay m-kay force-pushed the use-applications-resttemplate-for-autoconfigured-jwksretriever branch from ab85b21 to 3426f5c Compare March 31, 2020 13:56
@wilkinsona
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the proposal but I'm not sure that this is a good idea. Using an application-wide RestTemplate for communicating with the resource server may result in, for example, credentials being sent to the resource server that are only intended for another service.

Instead, I think it would be better to provide a customiser callback interface that can be used to fine-tune the auto-configured NimbusJwtDecoder. I've opened #20750 so that we can take a step back and consider that approach. Thanks anyway.

@wilkinsona wilkinsona closed this Mar 31, 2020
@wilkinsona wilkinsona added status: declined A suggestion or change that we don't feel we should currently apply and removed status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged labels Mar 31, 2020
@m-kay
Copy link
Contributor Author

m-kay commented Apr 1, 2020

Can I propose a solution for #20750 or does this issue need discussion first?

@wilkinsona
Copy link
Member

I noticed via an event on #20750 that you've prototyped something. Thanks for doing that. We'll hopefully discuss #20750 later today so if you can hold fire for a little while we should know what direction we want to go in pretty soon.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: declined A suggestion or change that we don't feel we should currently apply
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants