Repository navigation
Replies: 5 comments 1 reply
|
I read from Client Registration Policies: It says:
And in the Client registration page: It is clear that "Full Scope Allowed" is disabled. I wonder if this is disabled by default for all newly created DCR clients. What should we do to add the realm roles back? Is removing the Full Scope Allowed policy a good idea? Is there a better way? I confirmed that after removing this policy, the newly created DCR clients can have associated realm roles in the token. |
|
The client registration policies just enforce what is possible, not what is configured. So, when you change the policy to allow full scope that just means that when creating a client using client registration you can specify full scope; however, that means using the Keycloak client representations and not standard OAuth/OIDC client metadata. You'll probably want to do this by creating a client scope not using full scope allowed. We're overusing the name scope in Keycloak for sure, so let me try to explain
Then you need to allow the above client scopes for dynamic client registration by going to clients, then client registration, and selecting anynomous or authenticated depending on how ChatGPT authenticates to the client registration endpoints. Updated As a last step you need to make sure ChatGPT requests this scope when creating the client. |
|
Moving this to a discussion as this is not a bug; rather it is expected that roles are not mapped to dynamically registered clients out of the box. Full scope allowed is also something that really should only be used for dev/testing purposes. |
The client registration policies just enforce what is possible, not what is configured. So, when you change the policy to allow full scope that just means that when creating a client using client registration you can specify full scope; however, that means using the Keycloak client representations and not standard OAuth/OIDC client metadata.
You'll probably want to do this by creating a client scope not using full scope allowed. We're overusing the name scope in Keycloak for sure, so let me try to explain
Then you nee…