Re: [OAUTH-WG] device profile comments

David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com> Fri, 23 April 2010 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <recordond@gmail.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 0C9313A686D for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.669
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.930, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 gsv+kE75ywLk for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f194.google.com (mail-iw0-f194.google.com [209.85.223.194]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B67E73A67AD for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn32 with SMTP id 32so5915378iwn.18 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=kvtwhw5ux+XrKkz5PWtJR6xhBINMGwb49t3+CWdRwlc=; b=Paqto+rB80ayZKf9zbDy7sHowN9X/1uguDrmPK7UgDHvXl6tCtnaQY64lOP5kCoL0V VqzyRc4GImHQ6QPQkXu2jmPn1xVwmkCMj2uSCZAcuD25L1hwkm1CUMsNwkmIlGIODAiJ rXMRtM3YtCuKm9NK2wtnYTuu6dMkeQoFxUMP8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=CNfTCKV6cyPM9XTv7xYyfOJibfTYnPEaLKXJdzhBzd/3ZvXJAVyYKYz9dFMTz/ojlR zhkEcTUqGdpbX0qPskOp/yqJLMXANDNzHfNyrFHHUH/2jitnTwdfMAitVSrBfIJxE3ub fkDoq1JQDI5G2j8YsR8CjVXqlaB7a0wFsdLzU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.182.196 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <i2odaf5b9571004221649h733f675bva2f9f4438ef43921@mail.gmail.com>
References: <i2odaf5b9571004221649h733f675bva2f9f4438ef43921@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:44 -0700
Received: by 10.231.172.209 with SMTP id m17mr521035ibz.33.1271984324496; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <y2kfd6741651004221758y7d207961we2a6d1e65e6dd279@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Recordon <recordond@gmail.com>
To: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636c92ccfd24e560484dced43"
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] device profile comments
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:58:59 -0000

Thanks!


On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> wrote:
>
> So I’d propose changing the profile as follows:
>
> - Client requests device code by sending type=device and client_id=<id>
>

I might be reading something different than you are, but according to
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-oauth2-00#section-3.5.3.1 those are
the parameters included.



> - Authorization server doesn’t return approval URL - device hard-codes
> this instead.
>   I expect that this will point to a manufacturer specific page, and
> that the manufacturer specific page will automatically redirect to a
> page on the authorization server.
>

By having the Authorization Server pass the Client the approval URL it's
much easier to change over the lifetime of a living room device. This could
be in your application settings (for Facebook's usage) if it's pointing to a
page on the manufacturer's site. Or it gives the Authorization Server the
ability to change it if they're hosting the page.



> - Approval URL MUST have client_id, and MAY have callback.
>   I expect that the client_id will be used to brand the approval
> page, and that the callback will point to a manufacturer specific
> completion page.
>

I don't fully understand what you're proposing. The device would show a
screen which tells the user to visit http://fb.me/xbox and enter the code
123456. (Or to visit http://xbox.com/fb.) Asking a user to go to
http://goo.gl/?client_id=bndi12boi1 seems like it's prone to user error.


Plus a few comments on error codes:
>
> “End User Authorization Pending or Expired” - authorization server
> probably isn’t going to be able to tell whether a code has expired, or
> was never issued.  Probably just return “unknown_code”.
>
> The “slow_down” error probably merits an “interval”.  Maybe always
> return “interval” with authorization_pending, and eliminate the
> slow_down error code entirely?
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>
> [1] http://sites.google.com/site/oauthgoog/UXFedLogin/desktopapps
> [2] http://sites.google.com/site/oauthgoog/UXFedLogin/nobrowser
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>