Detect oauth2 even if there's no authorize_uri #135
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As long as we have a JWT and there's a token_uri, we can talk oauth2.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As long as we have a JWT and there's a token_uri, we can talk oauth2.
I ran into this while testing the bulk export flow against
https://bulk-data.smarthealthit.orgwhich does not expose anauthorize_uri, but does exposetoken_uriand can talk oauth2 with JWTs just fine.I am not confident that this is the best solution, but it is a solution. Should the code be even dumber and just use oauth2 if the
http://fhir-registry.smarthealthit.org/StructureDefinition/oauth-urissecurity extension is present at all? Given that there is no other auth system to fall back to, it seems reasonable to err on the side of oauth2. Happy to tweak this as folks like, or leave it as is.