Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering
John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Thu, 15 March 2012 10:49 UTC
Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6203721F84EA for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CO5+x8lekWOA for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B89D021F8534 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yhkk25 with SMTP id k25so237020yhk.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=7MhhjoextuHBzhYc/axhIV3lKU3ugYJQKi0XFOtr4MU=; b=osZNrf+8X+pY7V0jV4w8YDILr6cZuHwYXuQRR4yzbNybQlFG2lMBB5MvyTHC9Q+qOg YADEAU4pg8w03piuiOeFTCcLHRGgDpWxPXpaVssCSENsQbebUyqI1ZzLuznVW31YGd6R quqvtnVE1SsKE6EOnaVna1PEy8YS1qTje1t8HT8NxKYiPNMCm4S2mOnIdMZOwMwpBD4x bJ73bIdxa3HCwHerbhqLy36wJpngEYPE9FMhMh7sLu8Tzob0sxA5srikvF0spqxtI1fv Z7xmT56IujLCUB5J0YKF6INS7Dtk6NNLlQTshNgNSfEQ7tUFGBXtpPBP0TrIvw8YyQ+N 1OUw==
Received: by 10.224.185.16 with SMTP id cm16mr7074478qab.0.1331808555279; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.71.4.224] ([67.201.77.8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ef6sm3525275qab.7.2012.03.15.03.49.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:49:13 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_48127983-58C8-410E-B634-978547B0FB34"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F61C5D6.40106@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:49:12 -0400
Message-Id: <E6945187-8C87-4772-9A0E-293CDFF88133@ve7jtb.com>
References: <B327D847-B059-41D7-A468-8B8A5DB8BFCE@gmx.net> <2560E47E-655A-4048-AE5D-70EFF171D816@mitre.org> <4F61C5D6.40106@gmail.com>
To: Paul Madsen <paul.madsen@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk0cCPBGsdChZkyyYLzOdEB3RxUlWwkoVEROtDzYxWCpU/hsk5eV2XHHtEYvW1BwNyZR1MN
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:49:17 -0000
+1 to RS-AS OpenID Connect takes a slightly different approach to Paul's. The fact that people are reinventing the same wheel, indicates it has standardization potential. John B. On 2012-03-15, at 6:35 AM, Paul Madsen wrote: > +1 to defining RS-AS interactions. We've implemented such a 'token introspection' endpoint in our AS and I'm be happy to no longer need to explain to customers/partners why it's not part of the standard. > > As input, an (incomplete) spec for our endpoint enclosed. (we modeled the verification as a new grant type, leveraging as much as possible the existing token endpoint API) > > Wrt the 5 item limit > > 1) is this an arbitrary #? if people sign up to work on more items, could it be extended? > 2) the use cases document seems already well progressed (and informational). Need it count against the 5? > > paul > > On 3/14/12 5:53 PM, Richer, Justin P. wrote: >> >> Methods of connecting the PR to the AS are something that several groups have invented outside of the OAuth WG, and I think we should try to pull some of this work together. OAuth2 gives us a logical separation of the concerns but not a way to knit them back together. >> >> Proposals for inclusion in the discussion include UMA's Step 3, OpenID Connect's CheckID, and several "token introspection" endpoints in various implementations. >> >> -- Justin >> >> On Mar 14, 2012, at 4:21 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> >>> So, here is a proposal: >>> >>> ------- >>> >>> Web Authorization Protocol (oauth) >>> >>> Description of Working Group >>> >>> The Web Authorization (OAuth) protocol allows a user to grant >>> a third-party Web site or application access to the user's protected >>> resources, without necessarily revealing their long-term credentials, >>> or even their identity. For example, a photo-sharing site that supports >>> OAuth could allow its users to use a third-party printing Web site to >>> print their private pictures, without allowing the printing site to >>> gain full control of the user's account and without having the user >>> sharing his or her photo-sharing sites' long-term credential with the >>> printing site. >>> >>> The OAuth protocol suite encompasses >>> * a procedure for allowing a client to discover a resource server, >>> * a protocol for obtaining authorization tokens from an authorization >>> server with the resource owner's consent, >>> * protocols for presenting these authorization tokens to protected >>> resources for access to a resource, and >>> * consequently for sharing data in a security and privacy respective way. >>> >>> In April 2010 the OAuth 1.0 specification, documenting pre-IETF work, >>> was published as an informational document (RFC 5849). With the >>> completion of OAuth 1.0 the working group started their work on OAuth 2.0 >>> to incorporate implementation experience with version 1.0, additional >>> use cases, and various other security, readability, and interoperability >>> improvements. An extensive security analysis was conducted and the result >>> is available as a stand-alone document offering guidance for audiences >>> beyond the community of protocol implementers. >>> >>> The working group also developed security schemes for presenting authorization >>> tokens to access a protected resource. This led to the publication of >>> the bearer token as well as the message authentication code (MAC) access >>> authentication specification. >>> >>> OAuth 2.0 added the ability to trade a SAML assertion against an OAUTH token with >>> the SAML 2.0 bearer assertion profile. This offers interworking with existing >>> identity management solutions, in particular SAML based deployments. >>> >>> OAuth has enjoyed widespread adoption by the Internet application service provider >>> community. To build on this success we aim for nothing more than to make OAuth the >>> authorization framework of choice for any Internet protocol. Consequently, the >>> ongoing standardization effort within the OAuth working group is focused on >>> enhancing interoperability of OAuth deployments. While the core OAuth specification >>> truly is an important building block it relies on other specifications in order to >>> claim completeness. Luckily, these components already exist and have been deployed >>> on the Internet. Through the IETF standards process they will be improved in >>> quality and will undergo a rigorous review process. >>> >>> Goals and Milestones >>> >>> [Editor's Note: Here are the completed items.] >>> >>> Done Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Threat Model and Security Considerations' as a working group item >>> Done Submit 'HTTP Authentication: MAC Authentication' as a working group item >>> Done Submit 'The OAuth 2.0 Protocol: Bearer Tokens' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> Done Submit 'The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> [Editor's Note: Finishing existing work. Double-check the proposed dates - are they realistic?] >>> >>> Jun. 2012 Submit 'HTTP Authentication: MAC Authentication' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> Apr. 2012 Submit 'SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> Apr. 2012 Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> Apr. 2012 Submit 'An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> May 2012 Submit 'OAuth 2.0 Threat Model and Security Considerations' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC >>> >>> [Editor's Note: New work for the group. 5 items maximum! ] >>> >>> Aug. 2012 Submit 'Token Revocation' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> [Starting point for the work will be http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lodderstedt-oauth-revocation/] >>> >>> Nov. 2012 Submit 'JSON Web Token (JWT)' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-json-web-token] >>> >>> Nov. 2012 Submit 'JSON Web Token (JWT) Bearer Token Profiles for OAuth 2.0' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer] >>> >>> Jan. 2013 Submit 'OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Protocol' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hardjono-oauth-dynreg] >>> >>> Sep. 2012 Submit 'OAuth Use Cases' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC >>> >>> [Starting point for the work will be http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zeltsan-oauth-use-cases] >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OAuth mailing list >>> OAuth@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth >> _______________________________________________ >> OAuth mailing list >> OAuth@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > <ping-oauth-verification-01.txt>_______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
- [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Igor Faynberg
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Anthony Nadalin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Nat Sakimura
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Blaine Cook
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Richer, Justin P.
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Paul Madsen
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Zeltsan, Zachary (Zachary)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Blaine Cook
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Eran Hammer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth WG Re-Chartering Phil Hunt