IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] PoP Key Distribution

Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> Sat, 14 July 2018 01:29 UTC

Return-Path: <jricher@mit.edu>
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 00E18130F62 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tCTnPrlI9OZM for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu [18.9.25.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCB2A12426A for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1209190c-ac1ff70000004476-7e-5b495212f61c
Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id D3.CB.17526.212594B5; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 21:29:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w6E1TqIe019814; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 21:29:53 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (static-71-174-62-56.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [71.174.62.56]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w6E1TomQ001862 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Jul 2018 21:29:51 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\))
From: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <MW2PR00MB0298594ADC1B2904CC48D881F5400@MW2PR00MB0298.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 21:29:49 -0400
Cc: Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>, "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6E1C9B75-A00E-4FE0-AFE5-EBF687FA67BC@mit.edu>
References: <VI1PR0801MB211213D11E7820FD31218663FA420@VI1PR0801MB2112.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <58eac9f9-21a6-aa6d-ac28-6fce70cfa08e@ri.se> <MW2PR00MB0298594ADC1B2904CC48D881F5400@MW2PR00MB0298.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
To: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpkleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hTV1hUK8ow2aNqhYvHq83RWi4Yvq5ks Tr59xebA7HFi2RVWjyVLfjJ5LG3azBTAHMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVMenhS6aCKZIVV/7tZmpg vCfSxcjJISFgIjHv2STmLkYuDiGBxUwSi+cvYwZJCAlsZJTYtSQVInGNSaJlwllGkASzgKbE /u7lLF2MHBy8AsYS6y+Wg4SFBXQkHm28zwJiswmoSkxf08IEYnMKxEpsfbSWHcRmAYqvfb2T BWKMl8S89utQI7Ulli18DbaXV8BKYuWke+wQex8xSizecwusWUTAVuL3ob0sEFcrSiza2MA6 gVFgFpKTZiGcNAvJ2AWMzKsYZVNyq3RzEzNzilOTdYuTE/PyUot0DfVyM0v0UlNKNzGCQ1eS ZwfjmTdehxgFOBiVeHg3rPaIFmJNLCuuzD3EKMnBpCTKe87VM1qILyk/pTIjsTgjvqg0J7X4 EKMEB7OSCO8SU6Acb0piZVVqUT5MSpqDRUmcN3sRY7SQQHpiSWp2ampBahFMVoaDQ0mC1zgQ qFGwKDU9tSItM6cEIc3EwQkynAdo+IYAkOHFBYm5xZnpEPlTjLocf95PncQsxJKXn5cqJc77 DqRIAKQoozQPbg4o5bivs7N4xSgO9JYwrwfIOh5guoKb9ApoCRPQkrgUN5AlJYkIKakGRnWN yfPOtOptVN+47r9Uk9x+1XULOL78UWDPPb3unfX0C38/bMn7JOn7h/3wU7281X/ORepWnPXg kz6Yc3Pr5PyVD7kv9bY/r8rh/l+m1BR7JzR0VYLDBovn/yVypokIyX6d/GhfbhGbQ2rwBc8r DUlf1l2axfHmfcDu3BNMNf6aFVI5+QWPkpRYijMSDbWYi4oTAasr6AkUAwAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/CrK-yCC_7fs7sQriAlotZ8STPLg>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] PoP Key Distribution
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 01:29:58 -0000

I don’t believe that this is a useful spec without meaningful key presentation mechanisms. 

 — Justin

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 11:04 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> I'm fine putting some bandwidth into finishing OAuth PoP Key Distribution - particularly now that OAuth AS Metadata is finally done.  I know that Hannes is willing to do so as well.
> 
> 				-- Mike
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OAuth <oauth-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Ludwig Seitz
> Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 11:56 PM
> To: oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] PoP Key Distribution
> 
> On 2018-07-03 21:46, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
> .....
>> Where should the parameters needed for PoP key distribution should be 
>> defined? Currently, they are defined in two places -- in
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-13 and also in 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution-03. 
>> In particular, the audience and the token_type parameters are defined 
>> in both specs.
>> 
>> IMHO it appears that OAuth would be the best place to define the 
>> HTTP-based parameters. ACE could define the IoT-based protocols, such 
>> as CoAP, MQTT, and alike. Of course, this is subject for discussion, 
>> particularly if there is no interest in doing so in the OAuth working 
>> group.
>> 
> 
> I fully agree that OAuth would be the best place. I've only drawn some of these parameters into draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz because the work on draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution seemed to have been discontinued (it expired August 2017).
> That said, I'd hate to introduce a normative dependency into draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz on a document that will not move forward or only move very slowly. What are the prospects of going forward quickly with draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution?
> 
>> There is also a misalignment in terms of the content.. 
>> draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution defined an 'alg' parameter, 
>> which does not exist in the draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz document. The 
>> draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz document does, however, have a profile 
>> parameter, which does not exist in 
>> draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution. Some alignment is therefore 
>> needed. In the meanwhile the work on OAuth meta has been finalized and
> 
> It seems indeed that 'alg' and 'profile' parameters have some overlap, although 'alg' seemed a bit more narrow to me (which is why I created 'profile').  If we could extend the definition of 'alg' a bit, I'd be OK to remove 'profile' from the ACE draft (provided the OAuth draft moves forward in a timely manner).
> 
> 
> /Ludwig
> 
> --
> Ludwig Seitz, PhD
> Security Lab, RISE SICS
> Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email