Hi Nelson, Thank you for your patience! I like the plan for 4.0.0 and agree it'd be nice to land this KIP in time for 3.9.0.
+1 (binding) Cheers, Chris On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:44 PM Nelson B. <bachmanity...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I want to bring up this thread once more. > > I am hoping to include this KIP in the 3.9.0 release. The KIP freeze is on > July 3rd (next Wednesday), > so it would be great if we could finalize the vote by then. We are > targeting the 3.9.0 release because > we plan to piggyback on KIP-1030 and change the default value of the > `sasl.oauthbearer.header.urlencode` > parameter to `true` starting from release 4.0.0. This change will align the > oauthbearer handler implementation > with RFC-6749. > > Thanks. > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:39 PM Nelson B. <bachmanity...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I want to bump up this thread for visibility. > > Currently, this KIP is one binding vote short of being accepted. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 1:07 AM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> +1 (binding) > >> Thanks for the KIP! > >> > >> Mickael > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 7:12 PM Nelson B. <bachmanity...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > Just a kind reminder. I would really appreciate if we could get two > more > >> > binding +1 votes. > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > > >> > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024, 2:08 PM Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thanks for the KIP. > >> > > > >> > > +1 (binding) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 9:49 AM Kirk True <k...@kirktrue.pro> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > +1 (non-binding) > >> > > > > >> > > > Apologies. I thought I’d already voted :( > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Apr 7, 2024, at 10:48 AM, Nelson B. <bachmanity...@gmail.com > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Hi all, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Just wanted to bump up this thread for visibility. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks! > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 3:40 AM Doğuşcan Namal < > >> > > namal.dogus...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for checking it out Nelson. Yeah I think it makes sense > to > >> > > leave it > >> > > > >> for the users who want to use it for testing. > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 at 20:44, Nelson B. < > bachmanity...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >>> Hi Doğuşcan, > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> Thanks for your vote! > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> Currently, the usage of TLS depends on the protocol used by > the > >> > > > >>> authorization server which is configured > >> > > > >>> through the "sasl.oauthbearer.token.endpoint.url" option. So, > >> if the > >> > > > >>> URL address uses simple http (not https) > >> > > > >>> then secrets will be transmitted in plaintext. I think it's > >> possible > >> > > to > >> > > > >>> enforce using only https but I think any > >> > > > >>> production-grade authorization server uses https anyway and > >> maybe > >> > > users > >> > > > >> may > >> > > > >>> want to test using http in the dev environment. > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> Thanks, > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 3:56 PM Doğuşcan Namal < > >> > > namal.dogus...@gmail.com > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> wrote: > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>>> Hi Nelson, thanks for the KIP. > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> From the RFC: > >> > > > >>>> ``` > >> > > > >>>> The authorization server MUST require the use of TLS as > >> described in > >> > > > >>>> Section 1.6 when sending requests using password > >> authentication. > >> > > > >>>> ``` > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> I believe we already have an enforcement for OAuth to be > >> enabled > >> > > only > >> > > > >> in > >> > > > >>>> SSLChannel but would be good to double check. Sending secrets > >> over > >> > > > >>>> plaintext is a security bad practice :) > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> +1 (non-binding) from me. > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 16:00, Nelson B. < > >> bachmanity...@gmail.com> > >> > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>>> Hi all, > >> > > > >>>>> > >> > > > >>>>> I would like to start a vote on KIP-1025 > >> > > > >>>>> < > >> > > > >>>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1025%3A+Optionally+URL-encode+clientID+and+clientSecret+in+authorization+header > >> > > > >>>>>> , > >> > > > >>>>> which would optionally URL-encode clientID and clientSecret > >> in the > >> > > > >>>>> authorization header. > >> > > > >>>>> > >> > > > >>>>> I feel like all possible issues have been addressed in the > >> > > discussion > >> > > > >>>>> thread. > >> > > > >>>>> > >> > > > >>>>> Thanks, > >> > > > >>>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >
