googleapis / googleapis/google-cloud-node

google-auth-library: support client-side Credential Access Boundaries (Java ClientSideCredentialAccessBoundaryFactory equivalent)

Open
#8,855 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
Dominant language
TypeScript
Stars
3.2k
Forks
712
Avg merge
2d 3h
Merged PRs (30d)
99

Description

### Feature request

Support client-side Credential Access Boundaries in `google-auth-library-nodejs` — the equivalent of Java's [`ClientSideCredentialAccessBoundaryFactory`](https://github.com/googleapis/google-auth-library-java/tree/main/cab-token-generator).

### Background

The Node library ships the server-side `DownscopedClient`, which performs one STS token exchange per downscoped token. Google's IAM documentation ([Create a downscoped credential](https://cloud.google.com/iam/docs/create-downscoped-short-lived-credentials)) now describes the client-side approach — exchange once for an access boundary intermediary token, then mint downscoped tokens locally with varying boundary rules, no STS round trip per token — and calls it "the recommended approach because it provides better performance, scalability, and future feature compatibility."

Today that implementation exists only in Java (`cab-token-generator` module, `ClientSideCredentialAccessBoundaryFactory`). Searching the googleapis org, there is no Node, Python, or Go implementation and no open tracking issue, so filing this one for Node.

### Use case

A token broker minting many unique prefix-scoped Cloud Storage tokens at high frequency: per-tenant object-name prefixes, one short-lived token per tenant session. With the server-side `DownscopedClient`, every unique boundary costs an STS exchange against the `sts.googleapis.com` token-exchange quota (6,000/project/minute). Caching per tenant helps, but fresh-mint demand scales with distinct active tenants; client-side minting removes the ceiling entirely, as the docs note.

### Questions

1. Is client-side CAB support planned for `google-auth-library-nodejs`? Any timeline?
2. If it is not planned soon: is the intermediary-token wire format (the protobuf-encoded boundary + encryption scheme visible in Java's `cab-token-generator`) considered stable and supported for third-party client implementations, or is it internal and subject to change?

### Environment

`google-auth-library` 10.x on Node 24 / Bun, tokens consumed by Cloud Storage JSON/XML APIs.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Research direction

Start by reviewing the Java `cab-token-generator` module and `ClientSideCredentialAccessBoundaryFactory`, then compare them with the Node library's existing `DownscopedClient`. Determine the supported intermediary-token format and the Node API needed for local minting; done means client-side CAB support is implemented with the requested interoperability and usage behavior resolved.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
google-cloud, nodejs, typescript
Domain
authentication, backend, security
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
30/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.