IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] why are we signing?

Igor Faynberg <faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 10 November 2009 01:15 UTC

Return-Path: <faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35CF728C29C for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:15:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jIVtjrDDwxnY for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:15:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com (ihemail4.lucent.com [135.245.0.39]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D473A69DF for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:15:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from umail.lucent.com (h135-3-40-63.lucent.com [135.3.40.63]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id nAA1G3cv016048 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:16:03 -0600 (CST)
Received: from [135.244.39.234] (faynberg.lra.lucent.com [135.244.39.234]) by umail.lucent.com (8.13.8/TPES) with ESMTP id nAA1Fxwb010804; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:16:00 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <4AF8BECF.1080007@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:15:59 -0500
From: Igor Faynberg <faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com>
Organization: Alcatel-Lucent
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
References: <daf5b9570911082102u215dcf22gf0aeb2f3578e5ea0@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343785078711@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <daf5b9570911091627i3e70924bnda232246df3918fd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <daf5b9570911091627i3e70924bnda232246df3918fd@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.39
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] why are we signing?
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: faynberg@alcatel-lucent.com
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:15:49 -0000

Brian Eaton wrote:
> [...]
> OK, so let's consider OAuth-authenticated access to such a service...
> does signing requests improve security?
>
> I don't think so.  The user's password is going to be sent in
> clear-text when they log in to the service to approve the oauth token.
>   
[...]


Oh no!  This must never happen.  It MUST be that either Kerberos is 
employed to bypass sending of the password altogether, or the password 
is sent over TLS.

Igor

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email