Support SCIM Service Provider Configuration Schema ("ServiceProviderConfig") #15142
dpw13
started this conversation in
Password Manager
Replies: 1 comment
-
✨ Thank you for your code contribution proposal! While the Bitwarden team reviews your submission, we encourage you to check out our contribution guidelines. Please ensure that your code contribution includes a detailed description of what you would like to contribute, along with any relevant screenshots and links to existing feature requests. This information helps us gather feedback from the community and Bitwarden team members before you start writing code. To keep discussions focused, posts that do not include a proposal for a code contribution will be removed.
Thank you for contributing to Bitwarden! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Select Topic Area
✅ Code Contribution Proposal
Code Contribution Proposal
The SCIM RFC 7643 offers a method of dynamically reporting the SCIM service provider's capabilities: the "ServiceProviderConfig" endpoint. I noticed while attempting to integrate Authentik with Bitwarden Server that the ServiceProviderConfig endpoint is not currently supported (returning a 404 as well as a "No organization" warning in the logs due to a mistaken route). For context, if the ServiceProviderConfig endpoint is not implemented or the response does not conform to the SCIM 2.0 ServiceProviderConfig schema, Authentik currently assumes that the service provider does not support anything but the most minimal SCIM capabilities, meaning Authentik will not attempt to use the existing Patch support (or any other SCIM features that might be added in the future).
While not strictly required, implementing the ServiceProviderConfig endpoint may improve compatibility with other SCIM-enabled identity providers. The data returned can be fixed at compile time (as Bitwarden's SCIM capabilities are either enabled or disabled), so the complexity as well as the maintenance burden of the new endpoint should be small.
I already have a patch for implementing this endpoint but I wanted to get feedback before submitting a PR.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions