authn | Prototype version of AuthN service | REST library

getting given below error while trying to access the OKTA api could you please suggest the possible solution, in Angular

I'm using the ITfoxtec.Identity.Saml2 package and have it connected to the Danish NemLog-in 3. How do I require the NSIS level High in a SAML 2.0 Authn Request?

We are using apigee API gateway and exposing a REST endpoint. We understand apigee supports various options for securing the endpoint.

Our use case is that this REST endpoint should call another REST API provided by a software vendor. Software vendor have their own authentication and authorisation mechanism. Basically they have users and roles concept.

My question what is the best practise in this case? Should we authn and authz at gateway level Or at vendor REST API level or both ?

In any case, there is no escaping authn and authz at vendor REST API level.

Please suggest. Thank you.

settings.py

There's something I don't quite understand in the way RBAC works in Kubernetes.

I'll state what I understood and what not. Based on the documentation, the RBAC API defines 4 kinds of kubernetes objects:

• Role
• ClusterRole
• RoleBinding
• ClusterRoleBinding

Role
A Role defines a set of permissions within a specific namespace. The Role definition contains a namepsace field, and the Role object is created within that namespace. From the docs:

A Role always sets permissions within a particular namespace; when you create a Role, you have to specify the namespace it belongs in.

I suppose that this means that all the rules defined in the Role applies only to the objects that are in that namespace. I'll continue supposing this assumption is true, please correct me otherwise.

ClusterRole

ClusterRole, by contrast, is a non-namespaced resource.

From what I understand (again, correct me if I'm wrong) a ClusterRole is used to define rules that define permissions regarding to resources that are not bound to any namespace, such as nodes.

RoleBinding A RoleBinding object is a namespaced object. Its function is to bind Roles to subjects, i.e. grant subjects (users, ServiceAccounts, groups) with specific Role. It can also bind subjects with ClusterRoles.

ClusterRoleBinding
Not so much of my interest for the manner of this post.

My questions is, why is there a namespace metadata bit in the RoleBinding definition? If indeed as I assumed in the Role section, a Role grants permissions to objects only in the specified namespace of that Role, then that restriction is already defined in the Role object itself, why is it again defined in the RoleBinding object?

As I'm writing these lines I suddenly think of an optional answer to that question, please tell me if this is correct:

A RoleBinding can also bind a ClusterRole to a list of subjects, and the permissions defined in that ClusterRole will apply only to resources in the namespace specified in the RoleBinding object. That is why we need a namespace bit in the RoleBinding definition. Indeed it is not necessary when we use a RoleBinding to bind a Role rather than a ClusterRole.

Is that correct?

My log output is filled with UNEXPECTED EXTRA information I should not be seeing. I just added Log4j to a Java project at my company and this is happening.

FIle: log4j.properties

I had hosted a webapp on S3 and we used the S3 Hosting link to access the webapp. We have a Login option on the App that calls the Okta sign in link from within. Everything was working fine on the S3 link and I had enabled the Okta link on the S3 CORS as allowed origin. I recently added the S3 Origin to Cloudfront, now, I'm not able to procees with the Login as the Okta link is being blocked by CORS Policies.

Details :

1. The entire site is working normally as expected.
2. The CORS issue only comes up on the Cloudfront link. No CORS errors come up when using the S3 static link. ( as the S3 CORS have been added to allow Okta links )
3. Error that comes up : Cross origin resource sharing error: PreflightMissingAllowOriginHeader.

Access to fetch at 'https://{my_okta_org}.okta.com/api/v1/authn' from origin 'https://{cloudfront_release}.cloudfront.net' has been blocked by CORS policy: Response to preflight request doesn't pass access control check: No 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header is present on the requested resource. If an opaque response serves your needs, set the request's mode to 'no-cors' to fetch the resource with CORS disabled.

Questions:

1. What Config changes do I have to add on Cloudfront to allow the allowed CORS on S3?

Reference:

1. Ref-01
2. Ref - 02

Other Details :

1. CORS allowed in S3:

I’ve a go program which need to access to config map, when using the following clusterRole we got error forbidden

ok, here's my yet again evolved git awk script.