Re: [OAUTH-WG] Standardized error responses from protected resource endpoints

Takahiko Kawasaki <daru.tk@gmail.com> Wed, 30 July 2014 13:43 UTC

Return-Path: <daru.tk@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 133721A0064 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:43:05 -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 6mbhktl83FMo for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x235.google.com (mail-lb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88F881A0068 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 10so910704lbg.12 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=z3/T/MjpKOUb02bT5HAqiM4b1I49hSL+n9Afbq7Mjfk=; b=GU94Y+NgX8D0Uz8bgiGW32BIM4l0VOVKv6qWPABLdrAGFxmAR7Gia//gqZp1CTAGq0 vYGwHWq6xtEGisP4nc+xQfZIcdkXreFJsXd63qHZbA9MYA/2LLIHp8gAQuKPV+EzYo4N Uu11IVF/SfzatbXuh0vtsaUwLlJWDV+DB5RtGDDQIlhyRg6Rfw/1wG/w20UsmC5vJH5N CrKAkoBLE1N1MUsDXgslppaNC4m331eL5n/8aTdOVe2Le+eaxjmyccGNKmYfxWo78Vok hRwPtt2nt2xvEmmfyqolZI7fAPxuBUOF+hBuzetdArpiqalhfqRLBQXWJfvFA+b44Ed4 Hlug==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.30.71 with SMTP id q7mr4860238lah.56.1406727779568; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.135.106 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+k3eCQvqbo+UD+FC05iSzuY7bcKBf4BuB6n1PbPgWVZehN_Yg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGpwqP8QxsUBSNPhzk2Gh_E1Y9yUUUcQaV-Esuqt7JDXNX3qUA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCQvqbo+UD+FC05iSzuY7bcKBf4BuB6n1PbPgWVZehN_Yg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 22:42:59 +0900
Message-ID: <CAGpwqP9193oJnPnTRtCLN8o5Lr33ooeWid9WiteoH4egiA1QYA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Takahiko Kawasaki <daru.tk@gmail.com>
To: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/JyXqU3bz64wrYlChxPJyvVU6T1E
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Standardized error responses from protected resource endpoints
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: <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: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:43:05 -0000

Thank you very much. It is the specification for token_type=bearer
but really useful. I'm ashamed of having forgotten the content of
RFC 6750 although I had read it once before.

Best Regards,
Takahiko Kawasaki

2014-07-30 21:23 GMT+09:00 Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>:
> Take a look at RFC 6750 "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer
> Token Usage" - particularly section 3:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6750#section-3 which describes using the
> "WWW-Authenticate" response header field in response to a request with
> an invalid/insufficient/missing/etc token.
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Takahiko Kawasaki <daru.tk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a question. Is there any standardized specification about
>> error responses from protected resource endpoints?
>>
>> "RFC 6749, 7.2. Error Response" says "the specifics of such error
>> responses are beyond the scope of this specification", but I'm
>> wondering if OAuth WG has done something for that.
>>
>> >From error responses, I'd like to know information about:
>>
>>   (1) Usability (active or expired? (or not exist?))
>>   (2) Refreshability (associated usable refresh token exists?)
>>   (3) Sufficiency (usable but lacking necessary permissions?)
>>
>> For example, I'm expecting an error response like below with
>> "400 Bad Request" or "403 Forbidden".
>>
>>   {
>>     "error":"...",
>>     "error_description":"...",
>>     "error_uri":"...",
>>     "usable": true,
>>     "refreshable": true,
>>     "sufficient": false
>>   }
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Takahiko Kawasaki
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth