IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Flowchart for legs of OAuth

Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net> Mon, 04 April 2011 16:46 UTC

Return-Path: <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
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 4D4A628C118 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 09:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.620, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, SARE_LWSHORTT=1.24]
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 XbX5Uu2c2BDO for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 09:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtprelay02.ispgateway.de (smtprelay02.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.25]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F9928C110 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 09:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [80.187.101.251] (helo=[192.168.43.164]) by smtprelay02.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <torsten@lodderstedt.net>) id 1Q6mwz-0006Q5-Ey; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:48:25 +0200
Message-ID: <4D99F650.607@lodderstedt.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:48:16 +0200
From: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu@google.com>
References: <22FB565B-A701-4502-818F-15164D9E201A@oracle.com> <AANLkTimGjiCGk5dpA=YVzq5vDkLR2+caSz=pZ5WiZO9H@mail.gmail.com> <3C84AD7A-F00F-43EC-AAD3-AD2DCFB46B0E@oracle.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E7234464F432BB0@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4D84F7E2.6090305@redhat.com> <16B9A882-6204-4CBD-B7E3-1D806AF5056C@oracle.com> <4D8A5054.4050006@lodderstedt.net> <BANLkTiniuuRXtkzLubgOjVursVtOGjFe6A@mail.gmail.com> <7616C235-2913-4EE0-A710-F47A4CC9E424@oracle.com> <BANLkTi=XyF25vB6qKX2q8iOpEaZ1yQx9Jw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=XyF25vB6qKX2q8iOpEaZ1yQx9Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Df-Sender: torsten@lodderstedt-online.de
Cc: oauth@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Flowchart for legs of OAuth
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: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:46:45 -0000

+1

Am 01.04.2011 03:00, schrieb Marius Scurtescu:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Phil Hunt<phil.hunt@oracle.com>  wrote:
>> Done.
>>
>> It isn't quite what the flow shows in the earlier diagram. I was originally avoiding client type and trying to focus on section 4 options.
>>
>> But this should be a better diagram.
>>
>> http://independentidentity.blogspot.com/2011/03/oauth-flows-extended.html
> A native app with no client secret is still advised to use the
> implicit grant, which is wrong IMO.
>
> The right question I think is "does the client need long term offline access"?
>
> JavaScript clients typically don't need offline access (only with the
> user at the browser). Some native apps and web apps could be OK with a
> short term offline access, one off import for example.
>
> Marius

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email