-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 96
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
Various amends #20
Various amends #20
Conversation
Pass in the SP entity_id BaseProcessor was not being instantiated Pass extra config into the processor.create_identity method - this allows for providing additional params required by AWS IAM Saml2 This enables the staff-sso app to use as model based processor which can reference saml2 data config based on entity_id
Improve processor logic
Fix login view parses the authn request using correct binding
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.
Looks all good to me.
I've added a comment about a little bugfix which I just pushed which isn't in your fork, and another about a small possible optimization.
Do you find the separate is_enabled()
and has_access
methods on the Processor classes are okay, or could they be combined into a single method taking the request as param?
identity=identity, userid=request.user.username, | ||
name_id=NameID(format=resp_args['name_id_policy'].format, sp_name_qualifier=resp_args['sp_entity_id'], text=request.user.username), | ||
identity=identity, userid=user_id, | ||
name_id=NameID(format=resp_args['name_id_policy'].format, sp_name_qualifier=resp_args['sp_entity_id'], text=user_id), |
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.
As an fyi: this was changed from sp_name_qualifier=resp_args['destination']
to sp_name_qualifier=resp_args['sp_entity_id']
according to the issue filed here #18
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.
OK, makes sense - I'll test this in our UAT env tomorrow.
@mhindery I haven't had time to do what I wanted today - so maybe let's get this in a mergeable state and I'll raise another PR with some tests. |
I'm fine with merging this as it is. I'll then add some documentation about the changes as there are some backwards-incompatible changes, and publish a new version. Does that sound ok to you? |
Yes, that sounds good!
…On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 19:25, Mathieu Hinderyckx ***@***.***> wrote:
I'm fine with merging this as it is. I'll then add some documentation
about the changes as there are some backwards-incompatible changes, and
publish a new version. Does that sound ok to you?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#20 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAOhY4iR2HicjUgXMkNsO7EfwhdJgLbIks5vCOUpgaJpZM4Z6Y1z>
.
|
The docs have been updated, I've released a new version: https://pypi.org/project/djangosaml2idp/0.5.0/ Thank you for your contribution! |
As discussed, here's a PR with the changes that I've made to satisfy requirements for this project: https://www.github.com/uktrade/staff-sso. We have integrated our sso solution with Google and AWS via saml2, using this module.
Here's a summary of the changes: