Re: [Id-event] SAML subject identifier type

[Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>]

Hi Atul,

 

The ID Token subject type, as described in the document you are referencing, does not add any semantics, compared to a “phone number” or “email” subject type. So I don’t see the value in adding it.

 

In addition, it does not, actually, describe an ID Token. In fact the text is very clear that it describes a “subject” (a durable entity) rather than a session, and does it by citing various claims included in the ID token. So as a subject identifier type, it is not at all equivalent to a SAML assertion.

 

As to the SAML Assertion subject type, I think these use cases could be addressed by adding information to the event.

 

Thanks,

                Yaron

 

From: Atul Tulshibagwale <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 at 23:26
To: Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chris Phillips <[e-mail]>ca>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Id-event] SAML subject identifier type

 

Hi Yaron,

There are a few SSE use cases where the events are about a specific single sign-on session. You're right that this should not be limited to SAML. The RISC profile of SETs (based on which we are doing the SSE work) had the ID Token subject identifier type, which for some reason is missing in this spec (I did not realize until now). The specific events that need to refer to sessions are:

Identity provider context change: The conditions under which a SAML assertion or OIDC token was generated are no longer valid. This can be due to various things, including a password change.
Session property change: A session has been determined to have been compromised
Revocation: The issuer of the single sign-on SAML assertion or ID Token needs to be revoke
I can also add the ID Token claim from the RISC profile to my pull request.

 

Thanks,

Atul

 

 

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:32 PM Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]> wrote:

I need a lot more context here. So far, subject IDs have denoted durable entities, such as email addresses, phone numbers, account. This is adding a subject ID that denotes an ephemeral entity, basically similar to a session ID. This looks weird from an architectural point of view, and also begs the question, why specifically SAML and not other session types.

 

Thanks,

                Yaron 

 

From: Id-event <[e-mail]> on behalf of Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi=[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 at 00:14
To: Chris Phillips <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Id-event] SAML subject identifier type

 

Just clarifying the proposal as it stands today (before incorporating Chris's input):

The following section should be added in the "Subject Identifier Types" section:

4.9.  SAML Subject Identifier Type

   The SAML [SAML.REF] Subject Identifier Type describes a subject by
   the assertion identifier in the SAML assertion that was used to
   convey the subject's information to the Receiver.  Subject
   Identifiers of this type MUST contain an ` assertion_id"claim.  The
   value of this claim is a string that is equal to the Assertion
   Identifier in the SAML assertion.  The SAML Subject Identifier Type
   is identified by the name "saml`.

   Below is a non-normative example Subject Identifier for the SAML
   Subject Identifier Type:

   {
     "subject_type": "saml",
     "assertion_id": "_f551d88963ab4e3decb7cfe8f4dcc3f5",
   }

     Figure 8: Example: Subject Identifier for SAML Subject Identifier
                                   Type.

 

 

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 1:22 PM Atul Tulshibagwale <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi Chris,

I was proposing using the "assertion id" (SAML Core spec, line 553) in the proposal, not the "subject-id" as defined in SAML (spec section 3.3). The main reason was to be able to refer to a session that was established using a specific assertion. If it's useful, we could perhaps extend the SAML subject identifier type in this spec to include either the assertion_id or the subject_id claim.

 

Thanks,

Atul

 

 

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:30 AM Chris Phillips <[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi.

Quiet lurker observing..

Thanks for consider the SAML elements.. 

 

Atul, are you referring to the actual session identifier that someone may have where the Subject-Id was exchanged OR the actual Subject-id itself in your reference in the proposal with the github link?

 

I’m trying to square what I see on the git delta on line 294-296 in https://github..com/richanna/secevent/pull/1/commits/b20b6692eb50628927476ca78f9be077ace88994

 

 

And a Subject-id as shown in the example in 3.3.3 here: https://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml-subject-id-attr/v1.0/cs01/saml-subject-id-attr-v1.0-cs01.html#_Toc536097229

 

What you offered in the example is not a Subject-id  per the OASIS SAML spec as written in section 3.3.1

 

Am I mis-interpreting something?

 

C

 

 

From: Id-event <[e-mail]> on behalf of Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi=[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, July 13, 2020 at 12:17 PM
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Id-event] SAML subject identifier type

 

Hi all,

Based on the discussions in the SSE working group within the OpenID Foundation, we would like to propose that the subject identifier specification include a SAML subject identifier type. This is so that sessions established across peers using SAML may be identified in events that include the subject identifier.

 

 A SAML subject identifier has only one claim within it, the assertion id of the SAML assertion used to establish the single sign-on session.

 

This change is also included in my proposal here.

 

Thanks,

Atul

 

_______________________________________________
Id-event mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/id-event

_______________________________________________ Id-event mailing list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/id-event