Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case

Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com> Wed, 01 July 2015 13:07 UTC

Return-Path: <sberyozkin@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDC51A87E2 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 06:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 TKILI-gq6sZr for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 06:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 565801A87BB for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 06:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgqq4 with SMTP id q4so36363340wgq.1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 06:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EeDYW2UagDbSCmTncGLh5a8hBVbMWEwTNIJGwNxGOkg=; b=pfDt/fpUfshgRZq7BtCNWArf82say8v4UAYe13zmepLr7SPINI03cGvNA9LEv/LHy8 nCtW9Z32WX6S2MfJRyrz4rp8p19slBpCBL1m1XfZ9kB5ooiESGY5E7JeK59JGwxicP22 IgfZVlGXxMw1ZjUz+MNVraeHpisHtIk7eQpTyXH87A7COk3d8mmbosCMcgn8+RLM6MXc mYQlssXwT/gI81sX6jpUefetcvNRLvT8sMbd8BMDtgBY4bByG53rRgOYNvh5olAQDwlf H1e4FqYiPU5sVO4UsA/b5ZTcXGE+HB6Hkxq554xSCemuGE6S57AKy4kGh7GmOGitm3oB Xw7w==
X-Received: by 10.180.215.101 with SMTP id oh5mr6485729wic.6.1435756032045; Wed, 01 Jul 2015 06:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.36.226.2] ([80.169.137.63]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p2sm3373424wix.11.2015.07.01.06.07.11 for <oauth@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Jul 2015 06:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5593E5FD.3050403@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 14:07:09 +0100
From: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: oauth@ietf.org
References: <6B22D19DBF96664DBF49BC7B326402B42739A904@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com> <BY2PR03MB442205D40E8F1ECD88082F2F5AE0@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <55928DB3.7090300@gmail.com> <5593C270.7000008@gmail.com> <5593DA7D.80401@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5593DA7D.80401@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/Exrxkjqm8Fizpk_o0QOYtM4TwXE>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 13:07:15 -0000

Hi Justin

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-richer-oauth-chain-00 is much easier 
to read, that I can tell for sure, at least it is obvious why a given 
entity (RS1) may want to exchange the current token provided by a client 
for a new token. Definitely easily implementable...

One thing I'm not sure in the draft-richer-oauth-chain-00 about is on 
behalf of whose entity RS1 will be acting once it starts accessing RS2, 
On Behalf Of RO, or may be On Behalf Of (RO + Client), or may be it is 
On Behalf Of RO + Act As Client ? The last one seems most logical to me...

Thanks, Sergey

On 01/07/15 13:18, Justin Richer wrote:
> As it's written right now, it's a translation of some WS-* concepts into
> JWT format. It's not really OAuth-y (since the client has to understand
> the token format along with everyone else, and according to the authors
> the artifacts might not even be "OAuth tokens"), and that's my main
> issue with the document. Years ago, I proposed an OAuth-based token swap
> mechanism:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-richer-oauth-chain-00
>
> This works without defining semantics of the tokens themselves, just
> like the rest of OAuth. I've proposed to the authors of the current
> draft that it should incorporate both semantic (using JWT) and syntactic
> (using a simple token-agnostic grant) token swap mechanisms, and that
> the two could be easily compatible.
>
>   -- Justin
>
> On 7/1/2015 6:35 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> Hmm... perhaps the clue is in the draft title, token-exchange, so may
>> be it is a case of the given access token ("on_behalf_of" or "act_as"
>> claim) being used to request a new security token. One can only guess
>> though, does not seem like the authors are keen to answer the newbie
>> questions...
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>
>> On 30/06/15 13:38, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Can you please explain what is the difference between On-Behalf-Of
>>> semantics described in the draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 and the
>>> implicit On-Behalf-Of semantics a client OAuth2 token possesses ?
>>>
>>> For example, draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 mentions:
>>>
>>> "Whereas, with on-behalf-of semantics, principal A still has its own
>>> identity separate from B and it is explicitly understood that while B
>>> may have delegated its rights to A, any actions taken are being taken by
>>> A and not B. In a sense, A is an agent for B."
>>>
>>> This is a typical case with the authorization code flow where a client
>>> application acts on-behalf-of the user who authorized this application ?
>>>
>>> Sorry if I'm missing something
>>>
>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>> On 25/06/15 22:28, Mike Jones wrote:
>>>> That’s what
>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 is
>>>> about.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> -- Mike
>>>>
>>>> *From:*OAuth [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Vivek
>>>> Biswas
>>>> -T (vibiswas - XORIANT CORPORATION at Cisco)
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 25, 2015 2:20 PM
>>>> *To:* OAuth@ietf.org
>>>> *Subject:* [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>    I am looking to solve a use-case similar to WS-Security On-Behalf-Of
>>>> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/ws-trust/v1.4/errata01/os/ws-trust-1.4-errata01-os-complete.html#_Toc325658980>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> with OAuth JWT Token.
>>>>
>>>>    Is there a standard claim which we can define within the OAuth JWT
>>>> which denote the On-behalf-of User.
>>>>
>>>> For e.g., a Customer Representative trying to create token on behalf of
>>>> a customer and trying to execute services specific for that specific
>>>> customer.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Vivek Biswas,
>>>> CISSP
>>>>
>>>> *Cisco Systems, Inc <http://www.cisco.com/>*
>>>>
>>>> *Bldg. J, San Jose, USA,*
>>>>
>>>> *Phone: +1 408 527 9176*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth