4Screen Authentication

generated: '2026-09-05'
method: probed
source: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/.well-known/openid-configuration
docs: null
name: 4.screen API authentication
description: >-
  Every 4.screen API surface is protected. The whole of api.4screen.com answers
  HTTP 401 with a {"httpStatus":401,"domain":"SYSTEM","errorCode":"AUTHENTICATION_FAILED"}
  envelope for anonymous callers. Authentication is OpenID Connect / OAuth 2.0
  against a self-hosted Keycloak realm mounted under /auth on the same host, and
  that realm's discovery document IS served anonymously — so the auth contract
  is public even though the API contract is not.

x-evidence:
  fetched: '2026-09-05'
  discovery_url: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/.well-known/openid-configuration
  discovery_status: 200
  discovery_content_type: application/json;charset=UTF-8
  saved_verbatim: well-known/4screen-openid-configuration.json
  anonymous_api_probe:
    url: https://api.4screen.com/
    status: 401
    body: '{"httpStatus":401,"domain":"SYSTEM","errorCode":"AUTHENTICATION_FAILED","message":"Full authentication is required to access this resource"}'
  discovered_via: >-
    https://portal.4screen.com/config.js (HTTP 200) publishes
    window.AUTH_URL = 'https://api.4screen.com/auth' and
    window.AUTH_REALM = 'fourscreen', which is what located the realm path.

provider:
  identity_provider: Keycloak
  self_hosted: true
  issuer: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen
  realm: fourscreen
  note: >-
    Keycloak is 4.screen's own deployment on their own API host, not a
    third-party IDaaS tenant. The public_key and realm metadata are readable at
    https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen (HTTP 200).

schemes:
  - id: openIdConnect
    type: openIdConnect
    openIdConnectUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/.well-known/openid-configuration
    description: >-
      Full OIDC discovery is published. Clients obtain a bearer JWT from the
      Keycloak token endpoint and present it to api.4screen.com.
    in: header
    header: Authorization
    format: 'Bearer <JWT>'
  - id: oauth2
    type: oauth2
    description: >-
      OAuth 2.0 flows advertised by the realm. client_credentials is the
      server-to-server mode a partner integration would use; authorization_code
      with PKCE (S256 advertised) is what the browser portal uses.
    flows:
      clientCredentials:
        tokenUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/token
      authorizationCode:
        authorizationUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/auth
        tokenUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/token
        refreshUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/token
      deviceCode:
        deviceAuthorizationUrl: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/auth/device

endpoints:
  issuer: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen
  authorization: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/auth
  token: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/token
  introspection: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/token/introspect
  userinfo: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/userinfo
  jwks_uri: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/certs
  revocation: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/revoke
  end_session: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/logout
  device_authorization: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/auth/device
  backchannel_authentication: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/ext/ciba/auth
  pushed_authorization_request: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/protocol/openid-connect/ext/par/request
  dynamic_client_registration: https://api.4screen.com/auth/realms/fourscreen/clients-registrations/openid-connect

grant_types_supported:
  - authorization_code
  - client_credentials
  - implicit
  - password
  - refresh_token
  - 'urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:device_code'
  - 'urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:token-exchange'
  - 'urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:uma-ticket'
  - 'urn:openid:params:grant-type:ciba'

token_endpoint_auth_methods_supported:
  - private_key_jwt
  - client_secret_basic
  - client_secret_post
  - tls_client_auth
  - client_secret_jwt

capabilities:
  pkce: true
  pkce_methods: [plain, S256]
  mtls_client_auth: true
  mtls_bound_access_tokens: true
  pushed_authorization_requests: true
  par_required: false
  dpop: false
  dynamic_client_registration: true
  backchannel_logout: true
  frontchannel_logout: true
  request_object_support: true
  request_uri_registration_required: true
  claims_parameter_supported: true

id_token_signing_algs:
  - RS256
  - RS384
  - RS512
  - PS256
  - PS384
  - PS512
  - ES256
  - ES384
  - ES512
  - EdDSA
  - HS256
  - HS384
  - HS512

claims_supported: [aud, sub, iss, auth_time, name, given_name, family_name, preferred_username, email, acr]

known_clients:
  - client_id: portal
    surface: https://portal.4screen.com
    note: >-
      Public browser client for the 4.screen customer portal, named in the
      portal's own config.js. Its presence confirms authorization_code is the
      interactive flow; the partner/OEM integration path is client_credentials.

observations:
  - >-
    Notable weakness in the published posture: the realm still advertises the
    `implicit` and `password` (Resource Owner Password Credentials) grant types,
    both of which OAuth 2.0 Security BCP (RFC 9700) says MUST NOT be used. This
    is Keycloak's default surface rather than a deliberate 4.screen choice, but
    it is what the discovery document tells a client.
  - >-
    Notable strength: mutual-TLS client authentication and certificate-bound
    access tokens (RFC 8705) are both advertised, as are Pushed Authorization
    Requests (RFC 9126) and private_key_jwt — an unusually complete set for a
    company of this size, and the pieces a FAPI-grade integration needs.
  - >-
    require_pushed_authorization_requests is false, so PAR is available but not
    enforced.

gaps:
  - >-
    No published API reference, so which scope or role each endpoint requires is
    not documented anywhere public. The scope NAMES are known (see
    scopes/4screen-scopes.yml) but their operation mapping is not.
  - >-
    No documented API-key alternative for server-to-server callers; every
    integration goes through the OAuth token endpoint.