Skip to content

Native support for JWT #1038

Open

Description

@soundofspace

JWT is very popular and used a lot in backend services (and much more). So rama should natively support this. This should be added in rama-crypto either as a dependency that has been carefully choosen or by implement the RFC directly.

@GlenDC you mentioned JWT support in the past, any opinions here?

Was briefly mentioned in #391

Activity

  1. added
    CryptoCrypto primitives: JOSE/JWA, certs, OCSP/CRL, crypto backends (rama-crypto)
    on Jun 26, 2026
  2. GlenDC commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @GlenDC
    Member

    no opinions, but yes we should support it indeed nicely and compeltely, from a client, server and proxy POV, as alwys.

    Also might be good to read upon recent developments, but also opinion pieces and articles such as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558147. Not to say the value they have, but would be silly to not read that kind of stuff either.

  3. soundofspace commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @soundofspace
    CollaboratorAuthor

    @GlenDC I personally almost never use JWT's for exactly that reason. They really have their place but for a generic backend service they are almost always the wrong tool indeed

  4. GlenDC commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @GlenDC
    Member

    Yeah so let's make sure in our jwt module that we clearly document that, rama is also supposed to be educational. ALso more in depth explanation in a rama book chapter.

  5. soundofspace commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @soundofspace
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Sounds good, once we go more down that road we should probably also add services/layers for session support. Or rely on our tower bridge to be able to use crates such as tower_sessions to do that for us

  6. GlenDC commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @GlenDC
    Member

    yes for sure, in general I want to provide more in depth support for authentication in rama, e.g. also oauth2, webauthn etc.... as alwys from client, server and proxy POV, but that is ofc not within scope of this issue, but it's for sure on my mind

    and yes that is the right approach. You want to support it on several layers. Building blocks + nice end-user experience (e.g. layers). The both indeed

  7. added
    AuthAuthn/authz: Basic/Bearer, proxy auth, mTLS client identities, JWT, message signatures
    on Sep 30, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    AuthAuthn/authz: Basic/Bearer, proxy auth, mTLS client identities, JWT, message signaturesCore TeamTicket reserved for Core TeamCryptoCrypto primitives: JOSE/JWA, certs, OCSP/CRL, crypto backends (rama-crypto)needs input

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions