[bug] fix the address issue for OIDC about casdoor HOT 10 CLOSED

@tangyang9464 @JalinWang @imp2002

from casdoor.

When searching for the issue I found this previous issue with additional information: #1184.
There is some mention of previously reverted code due to conflict and a hint on a possible way to fix it.

I won't have time to look at it so Good luck :).

from casdoor.

And exactly the same problem with proxmox authorization

from casdoor.

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 1.632.0 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

from casdoor.

Commit was reverted so probably make sense to reopen the issue.
Tested the 1.632.0 release, and it was failing too.

When manually exchanging the code for token I could see:

  "address": {
    "formatted": "",
    "street_address": "",
    "locality": "",
    "region": "",
    "postal_code": "",
    "country": ""
  },

So a bit unsure why it would fail, but I would recommend to just not include the field when there is no data.

from casdoor.

Commit was reverted so probably make sense to reopen the issue. Tested the 1.632.0 release, and it was failing too.

When manually exchanging the code for token I could see:

  "address": {
    "formatted": "",
    "street_address": "",
    "locality": "",
    "region": "",
    "postal_code": "",
    "country": ""
  },

So a bit unsure why it would fail, but I would recommend to just not include the field when there is no data.

can you tell us what tool / platform you are using that cause this problem ?

from casdoor.

I'm using https://github.com/ramosbugs/openidconnect-rs which in general follow the spec quite strictly.

Since the change in 1.632.0 was reverted I did not spend more time trying to understand why it failed even with the new format.

from casdoor.

I'm using https://github.com/ramosbugs/openidconnect-rs which in general follow the spec quite strictly.

Since the change in 1.632.0 was reverted I did not spend more time trying to understand why it failed even with the new format.

thanks for reply, we will try to fix it soon.

from casdoor.

I'm using https://github.com/ramosbugs/openidconnect-rs which in general follow the spec quite strictly.

Since the change in 1.632.0 was reverted I did not spend more time trying to understand why it failed even with the new format.

I guess you are using the gitlab example of the openidcinnect-rs. however, the gitlab exapmle example add some external fields to the UserInfoClaim, you can remove the relevant these field to fix the problem, like below.

struct GitLabClaims {
    // Deprecated and thus optional as it might be removed in the futre
    // sub_legacy: Option<String>,
    // groups: Vec<String>,
}

** Note: you need to use v1.632.0 **

from casdoor.

Just to clarify I'm not really using Casdoor, I'm maintaining a PR to add OpenId Connect to Vaultwarden and someone had issues with it.

As for your suggestion since the Address is part of the default CoreIdTokenClaims it's not easy to ignore.

from casdoor.