Skip to content

fix: add scopes to token hook on authorization_code #3970

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

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sousandrei
Copy link

@sousandrei sousandrei commented Mar 27, 2025

Related issue(s)

#3969 #3891 #3969
Adding authorization_code to conditional of adding scopes to the requests for the token hook

Checklist

  • I have read the contributing guidelines.
  • I have referenced an issue containing the design document if my change
    introduces a new feature.
  • I am following the
    contributing code guidelines.
  • I have read the security policy.
  • I confirm that this pull request does not address a security
    vulnerability. If this pull request addresses a security vulnerability, I
    confirm that I got the approval (please contact
    [email protected]) from the maintainers to push
    the changes.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature
    works.
  • I have added or changed the documentation.

Further Comments

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Mar 27, 2025

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@@ -1178,7 +1178,8 @@ func (h *Handler) oauth2TokenExchange(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {

if accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeClientCredentials)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeJWTBearer)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypePassword)) {
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypePassword)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeAuthorizationCode)) {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the reason that authorization code is left out of here is that a lot of this information is already determined when handling the authorization endpoint. I think the token endpoint should not be receiving the scope and audience parameters in the authorization code flow.

Line 1306 calls Handler.updateSessionWithRequest which should grant the scopes. If the scopes aren't available in the token hook, I think something else must be going on.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And I hope the drive-by is welcome! I'm not a maintainer here or anything, just someone who saw your note about this PR on Slack and was curious and has spent some time recently staring at some of this code.

Copy link

@tilgovi tilgovi Apr 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think what may be happening here is that fosite is supposed to handle this but it's called in two phases. First it's called to process the token request, then it's called to issue the token response. I think the token hook might be getting called in between these two phases. Moving some code between the two phases in fosite fixes the issue, I think.

I put up a draft fosite PR that seems to fix this for me, but haven't checked yet whether tests need to be updated or looked into whether there are other consequences to be aware of.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just to explain that a little more clearly, maybe. The token endpoint handler does these things:

  1. Calls fosite.OAuth2Provider.NewAccessRequest(), which calls the fosite code to handle the token request. This is just above your patch.
  2. Runs the code around where you've patched here, to handle some things that fosite does not.
  3. Calls all the hooks returned from Registry.AccessTokenHooks(), just below the code in your patch. That's where the token hook gets called.
  4. Calls fosite.OAuth2Provider.NewAccessResponse(), which calls the fosite code to generate a response.

So, I think my patch in fosite is moving the code that reads the granted scope and audience, already set and persisted by the consent flow, and updates the token request. It moves this from step 4 to step 1 so that it's visible in the token hook in step 3.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you are on to something!
I'll keep this PR in draft until we have a resolution from your's as well if you don't mind

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That sounds like the right move!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello, this definitely is not correct. This code part is only for machine interaction. User interaction has to be done differently.

@@ -1178,7 +1178,8 @@ func (h *Handler) oauth2TokenExchange(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {

if accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeClientCredentials)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeJWTBearer)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypePassword)) {
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypePassword)) ||
accessRequest.GetGrantTypes().ExactOne(string(fosite.GrantTypeAuthorizationCode)) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello, this definitely is not correct. This code part is only for machine interaction. User interaction has to be done differently.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants