Added check to handle token parsing with claims without "sub". #3287
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…e token subjact if sub is not present in claims Signed-off-by: wassafshahzad <[email protected]>
wassafshahzad
force-pushed
the
fix/claim-parsing-oidc-introspection
branch
from
03721d1
to
c7467c4
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
In the oidc_introspection.py
func (filter *oidcIntrospectionFilter) Request(ctx filters.FilterContext)function get value form the Claim map usingsubkey and then casts the value into a string, but this would panic if no sub key is present. I added a check to ensure we only cast values if sub key is present.Linked Issue
closes #3216
Approach to solution
As describe in the following comment, I dug a bit deeper and found 2 suitable values to use if subject is not present in token. One is the Subject value in tokenContainer struct or UserInfo Struct. I decided to go with the tokenContainer struct. If this is not correct please do guide me if UserInfo Struct would be better.