Hi all,
I would like to find out what the licenses of *all* components and
dependencies that make up SaToSa. Any suggestion to how to do that in an
automated fashion?
I could walk down the libraries manually in
virtualenv/lib/python3.5/site-packages, but that is rather tedious and
error prone. I also found some scripts to do this for me, however these
seem to just report what is in use at the os/system level, not
specifically for our virtualenv.
Any suggestions, or a solution you may have used previously?
Niels
--
Niels van Dijk Technical Product Manager Trust & Security
Mob: +31 651347657 | Skype: cdr-80 | PGP Key ID: 0xDE7BB2F5
SURFnet BV | PO.Box 19035 | NL-3501 DA Utrecht | The Netherlands
www.surfnet.nlwww.openconext.org
Hey everyone,
I am writing a SATOSA front end that implements SAML 2.0 IdP-initiated
(unsolicited) SSO. Currently, I plan to generate a SAML AuthnRequest
using a request variable (`providerID`) that names the service provider.
Eventually, I'd like to implement the same interface as Shibboleth
(request variables `shire`, `target`, and `time`) because I'm just not
that creative.
I have some (well, a lot of) questions:
- How do I get a list of SAMLFrontend endpoints?
- There could be more than one SAMLFrontend configured. How would I
know which one to use?
- I don't want to rely on JavaScript or the user to submit a form.
Can I send the AuthnRequest to the selected SAMLFrontend's HTTP-Redirect
endpoint via satosa.response.Redirect?
- Is it OK to omit the RelayState?
- In the SAML AuthnRequest, can I specify
AssertionConsumerServiceIndex="0"?
- If not, how do I look up the SP's AssertionConsumerServiceURL?
- In the SAML AuthnRequest, can I omit the Destination?
- If not, which endpoint should I set Destination to---HTTP-Redirect
or HTTP-POST?
- If I construct the redirect URL manually, do I base64-encode the
AuthnRequest using Python's base64.urlsafe_b64encode()?
- Should I use the urllib or requests library to construct the URL
instead?
Thanks in advance! :)
Best wishes,
Matthew
--
"The lyf so short, the craft so longe to lerne."
Hey everyone,
Now that satosa-microservices are split into their own repository we
should set the process which acquires them back to the setup. There
are many options here:
- have each microservice be its own python package and selectively
install it using pip
- have the microservices repo be a package itself and use pip to install it
- have microservices repo as a git module under satosa (not suggested)
- have microservices as something completely external and fetch using
http/git (as shown below). This could mean a lot of different things -
ie, should microservices use code from satosa? if so, satosa is a
dependency to microservices and as such this makes microservices a
package with dependencies, etc.
- (more options?)
Skoranda mentioned that
> If you need the LDAP Attribute Store microservice you must also install ldap3 using pip:
This indicates that certain microservices have their own dependencies.
Users cannot guess what dependencies are needed for a certain
microservice. This information should be explicit and automatically
resolved by the microservice installation process.
This leads me to think to having each microservice as a separate
(python) package, with its own dependencies and deployment process, is
the way to go.
This is not a simple decision to make. Let's have a discussion on how
the dev-community think it is better to be solved.
Cheers,
PS: This discussion was triggered by skoranda's PR here:
https://github.com/IdentityPython/SATOSA/pull/168#discussion_r149634137
--
Ivan c00kiemon5ter Kanakarakis >:3
