shroff/phylum
9
89
Fork
You've already forked phylum
1

[server][auth] add OIDC PKCE support #13

Merged
shroff merged 2 commits from gbw/phylum:add_pkce_support into main 2025年07月09日 10:28:29 +02:00
Contributor
Copy link

also supported by google oidc -- code_challenge_methods_supported per https://accounts.google.com/.well-known/openid-configuration

also supported by google oidc -- `code_challenge_methods_supported` per https://accounts.google.com/.well-known/openid-configuration

Great work! Definitely nice to support more secure standards.

What would happen if a provider doesn't support this challenge method? Is it the client's responsibility to ensure support or is it backwards compatible by default? My guess is the former but I'm not sure.

Great work! Definitely nice to support more secure standards. What would happen if a provider doesn't support this challenge method? Is it the client's responsibility to ensure support or is it backwards compatible by default? My guess is the former but I'm not sure.
Author
Contributor
Copy link

if the IDP followed rfc 6749, then "The authorization server MUST ignore unrecognized request parameters." however there's no guarantees that every IDP does so.
i did a quick check of some IDPs listed here and almost all of them do support pkce. i can see three potential options:

  1. accept it as is
  2. check the well-known endpoint for capabilities (specifically look for code_challenge_methods_supported and S256)
  3. add a config variable for it
if the IDP followed rfc 6749, then "The authorization server MUST ignore unrecognized request parameters." however there's no guarantees that every IDP does so. i did a quick check of some IDPs listed [here](https://github.com/lastlogin-net/obligator?tab=readme-ov-file#comparison-is-the-thief-of-joy) and almost all of them do support pkce. i can see three potential options: 1. accept it as is 2. check the well-known endpoint for capabilities (specifically look for code_challenge_methods_supported and S256) 3. add a config variable for it

I was thinking more along the lines of 2, but I think it's more work than it's worth at this point

I was thinking more along the lines of 2, but I think it's more work than it's worth at this point

I was thinking more along the lines of 2, but I think it's more work than it's worth at this point

I was thinking more along the lines of 2, but I think it's more work than it's worth at this point
gbw deleted branch add_pkce_support 2025年07月10日 05:54:42 +02:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
shroff/phylum!13
Reference in a new issue
shroff/phylum
No description provided.
Delete branch "gbw/phylum:add_pkce_support"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?