-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.3k
Make acceptable AAGUID ckeck in WebAuthn stricter #48404
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
Open
rmartinc
wants to merge
2
commits into
keycloak:main
Choose a base branch
from
rmartinc:issue-48388
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
12 changes: 12 additions & 0 deletions
12
docs/documentation/upgrading/topics/changes/changes-26_6_2.adoc
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ | ||
| == Notable changes | ||
|
|
||
| Notable changes may include internal behavior changes that prevent common misconfigurations, bugs that are fixed, or changes to simplify running {project_name}. | ||
| It also lists significant changes to internal APIs. | ||
|
|
||
| === WebAuthn acceptable AAGUIDs option restricts authenticators strictly | ||
|
|
||
| The WebAuthn policy presents the option **Acceptable AAGUIDs** to restrict the authenticators that are allowed to register new credentials. The AAGUID (Authenticator Attestation Global Unique Identifier) is an identifier for the authenticator's type (e.g., make and model). This option requires the **Attestation conveyance preference** to be configured too (normally `Direct`), in order to force the authenticator to include the attestation inside the registration data. | ||
|
|
||
| Since this release, when this option is setup, the attestation is required to be present and signed with a valid certificate for the {project_name} trust-store. The `None` attestation format is explicitly not permitted. Previously, there were some corner cases in which a self attestation was accepted. The change is expected to be harmless, but maybe there are combinations of authenticators and WebAuthn policies that can present issues. | ||
|
|
||
| See chapter link:{adminguide_link}#_webauthn-policy[Managing policy] in the {adminguide_name} for more information. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rmartinc The emptiness check seems to be a little bit fragile. Would it be possible to use sth like this?
cc: @edewit or do you know about a better approach? Thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep, much more robust! Done but with lint modifications...