snazy commented on issue #1929: URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1929#issuecomment-3052331018
Honestly, I think that having more functionality that gears towards what IdPs are is adding quite some burden (see Dmitri's security concerns) to the Polaris project. IMHO the management of principals (aka: client-IDs/secrets) in Polaris is rather something to get Polaris up and running quickly. For production purposes I'd always recommend relying on a "proper IdP". Now, in your migration one-off use case you could consider migrating the "raw tables". Because of the different ways the persistence implementations generate IDs, I'd personally not do that though, but it's an option with a lot of fine print wrt testing of course. On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 4:47 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov ***@***.***> wrote: > > dimas-b left a comment (apache/polaris#1929) > > @fivetran-arunsuri : I do not mean to block your suggestion, although I do think there are some security concerns with allowing arbitrary client IDs and sending passwords on the wire. In any case, it's a major API change and the current process is to initiate dev list discussions in these cases. Would you mind starting a thread on the dev email list for this? > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@polaris.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
