Skip to content
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

Using CloudEvents extension Authcontext for certain event types #150

Open
shilpa-padgaonkar opened this issue Mar 2, 2024 · 4 comments
Open
Labels

Comments

@shilpa-padgaonkar
Copy link
Collaborator

shilpa-padgaonkar commented Mar 2, 2024

Problem description
Does it make sense to add the authcontext cloudevents extension for certain implicit subscriptions so that device id need not be added to data?

Possible evolution
Include the authcontext extension where applicable

Alternative solution

Additional context

@shilpa-padgaonkar shilpa-padgaonkar added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 2, 2024
@bigludo7
Copy link
Collaborator

bigludo7 commented Mar 4, 2024

@shilpa-padgaonkar I will probably need more to understand how to leverage the 3 attributes: authtype, authid and authclaims.
Suppose here for implicit subscription that the Application XXX for a carrier billing payment on line 0601 request to get notified. My understanding will to use Auth Context as such:

"authContext": {
   "authtype": "service_account"
   "authid" : "XXX"
}

Reading the document I got the feeling that this more to identify the application triggering the notification than identifying the device id which is notified.
WDYT ?

@PedroDiez
Copy link
Collaborator

My two cents:

  • Prefer to no manage this so far. It is not related to Events securization. As per CloudEvents: T_his extension embeds information about the principal which triggered an occurrence. This allows consumers of the CloudEvent to perform user-dependent actions without requiring the user ID to be embedded in the data or source field_
  • Currently, in CAMARA APIs (AFAIK) we do not manage explicitly “user ID” concept, this could also have considerations within I&CM. We are also in opening discussion about how to manage different device identifiers in implementation (Issue#127) as well as an issue to propose Device model simplification (Issue#171). So my feeling is that will can generate more discussion around this

@shilpa-padgaonkar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shilpa-padgaonkar commented Apr 16, 2024

@PedroDiez @bigludo7 IMHO we can leave this issue out of meta-release scope. As @PedroDiez has mentioned, the user-id concept will need some conclusion in ICM wg probably under camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement#136 . Hence, this issue was also not added to the consolidated issue for subscriptions, as this can be dealt with later.

@shilpa-padgaonkar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Setting label backlog as discussed here #185

This issue will be taken up after we have some more progress here camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement#136

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants