Skip to content

[Security] Add FirewallUserAuthenticator - authenticate users in any firewall #39346

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

wucdbm
Copy link
Contributor

@wucdbm wucdbm commented Dec 6, 2020

Q A
Branch? 5.4
Bug fix? no
New feature? yes
Deprecations? no
Tickets #37575
License MIT
Doc PR not yet

As per #37575 (comment)

I've added a Symfony\Bundle\SecurityBundle\Security\FirewallUserAuthenticator to allow authenticating users in another firewall, different to the one the user is currently at.
For a broader reasoning, please refer to the above comment link.

TODO:

  • Tests
  • Documentation
  • can FirewallContext ever return a null FirewallConfig?

I'll need to know under which section to document the new feature in CHANGELOG.md. 5.x?
And possibly some guidance for Docs, I didn't have a look there yet.

@wouterj Have a look :)

@wucdbm wucdbm changed the title add FirewallUserAuthenticator - authenticate users in any firewall [Security] Add FirewallUserAuthenticator - authenticate users in any firewall Dec 6, 2020
@jderusse jderusse added this to the 5.x milestone Dec 6, 2020
@OskarStark OskarStark changed the title [Security] Add FirewallUserAuthenticator - authenticate users in any firewall [Security] Add FirewallUserAuthenticator - authenticate users in any firewall Aug 4, 2021
* @author Martin Kirilov <wucdbm@gmail.com>
*
* @final
* @experimental in 5.2
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this should be introduced as experimental, it needs to target 6.0 please

@chalasr
Copy link
Member

chalasr commented Aug 7, 2021

Thank you for this.
I'm going to close this PR in favor of #41274 as it is more recent and proposes a different implementation that looks better.

@chalasr chalasr closed this Aug 7, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants