Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signatures and other open issues
"Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com> Tue, 28 September 2010 07:34 UTC
Return-Path: <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.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 4A67F3A6C83 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.416
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.484, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AU=0.377, HOST_EQ_AU=0.327, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
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 IIronGP09H3y for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ipxbno.tcif.telstra.com.au (ipxbno.tcif.telstra.com.au [203.35.82.204]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39B33A6851 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.57,246,1283695200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="12544858"
Received: from unknown (HELO ipcani.tcif.telstra.com.au) ([10.97.216.200]) by ipobni.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2010 17:35:32 +1000
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6119"; a="9967398"
Received: from wsmsg3757.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.85]) by ipcani.tcif.telstra.com.au with ESMTP; 28 Sep 2010 17:35:32 +1000
Received: from WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.159]) by wsmsg3757.srv.dir.telstra.com ([172.49.40.85]) with mapi; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:35:32 +1000
From: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>, "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:35:30 +1000
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signatures and other open issues
Thread-Index: Actez1CK1yneinyMRserD5y1FIwYngAC2uPA
Message-ID: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1126C437335@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
References: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D460DB5BE@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343D460DB5BE@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-AU
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-AU
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1126C437335WSMSG3153Vsrv_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signatures and other open issues
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: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:34:58 -0000
Sounds great Eran, > 1. Add a parameter to the token response to include an extensible token scheme. Yes. I suggest a parameter named "scheme". The value can be an HTTP authentication scheme name (eg "scheme":"BASIC") for which the response is providing credentials. Not all possibilities are HTTP authentication schemes but they can be assigned pseudo-HTTP-auth-scheme-names (eg "scheme":"TLS-PSK"). > The default (if omitted) will be whatever the bearer token scheme is called. May as well include the bearer token scheme name (ie don't bother with a default). Might even be convenient to use the scheme name as a JSON key in a token response. "credentials":{ "bearer":{"token":"54er"}, "basic":{"userid":"jim","password":"beer2"} } > 2. Break the core specification into multiple parts. Yes. Hopefully the "using a token" parts don't have to be OAuth-specific. They might not even use the term "token". A signature spec could use an "id" and "key", without caring whether or not those items came from a "getting a token" response or from a config file. > 3. Introduce two signature proposals in one or more documents, for the JSON token and 1.0a-like method. Yes. Separate docs for each signature proposal sounds best to me. > --- Benefits > > 2. Solve a few open issues: > > * The need to decide on discovery for the entire protocol (moves it to each scheme). I don't think it removes much of the need for discovery. Apps still need to discover that OAuth delegation can be used to access a resource (and where to send the user). I suspect the token response performs some of the discovery related to specific schemes (eg the response says "here is a token to use with the 'BEARER' scheme", or "here is an id for this delegation and a secret to used in signature scheme XYZ". -- James Manger
- [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signatures… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Manger, James H
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Stefanie Dronia
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Luke Shepard
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Marius Scurtescu
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… John Panzer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Keenan, Bill
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Lu, Hui-Lan (Huilan)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Lu, Hui-Lan (Huilan)
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Dick Hardt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Mark Mcgloin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Anthony Nadalin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Mark Mcgloin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Thomas Hardjono
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Luke Shepard
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Lukas Rosenstock
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Dick Hardt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Dick Hardt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Pelle Wessman
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Looking for a compromise on signat… Breno