Create an interface to abstract the upstream IDP from the
authorize, IDP discovery, callback, choose IDP, and login
endpoints. This commit does not refactor the token endpoint,
which will be refactored in a similar way in the next commit.
- Simplify the error handling in the authorize endpoint by making the
private helper functions return fosite-style errors, and having
one place that writes those errors to the response.
- Some types of errors were previously returned as regular http-style
errors. Those have all been converted to be returned as oauth-style
errors (which can be redirects to the client), except for http method
not found errors. This is a change in behavior from the client's point
of view, but only when those unexpected errors happen. These types of
errors are more consistent with RFC6749 section 4.1.2.1.
- Avoids using the httperr package for error handling.
- Create a struct for the handler as a first step toward making smaller
functions with fewer parameters.
In the RFC8693 token exchange, the CLI sends your access token and
receives in exchange a new cluster-scoped ID token.
Fix a bug in the CLI. Whenever the "pinniped login oidc" command was
planning to perform the RFC8693 token exchange, it failed to check if
the cached access token was still valid before performing the exchange,
which sends the access token. It instead checked if the cached ID token
was still valid, but that it not relevant in this situation because the
ID token is not going to be used for anything (instead the new ID token
returned by the RFC8693 token exchange will be used for auth).
This bug doesn't actually matter today, because the Supervisor-issued
access and ID tokens always both have the same 2-minute lifetimes.
However, future enhancements may cause them to have different lifetimes
in certain circumstances. Fixing this CLI bug now to prepare for those
potential future enhancements.
To make the subject of the downstream ID token more unique when
there are multiple IDPs. It is possible to define two IDPs in a
FederationDomain using the same identity provider CR, in which
case the only thing that would make the subject claim different
is adding the IDP display name into the values of the subject claim.
