Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-par-03.txt

Francis Pouatcha <fpo@adorsys.de> Wed, 12 August 2020 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <fpo@adorsys.de>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C759C3A1168 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.088
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.088 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_MIME_MALF=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=adorsys.de
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 VgZbOQJH2_ED for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (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 716AA3A113E for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id f1so2858279wro.2 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=adorsys.de; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9lSZhmVvbZFQ0JFGH1qAy19aaezaoAC/1skwq3QhjQ8=; b=QXDLIKEZc5e3Yvx3WYjZWwI84knf7NtTVszPHoJckDry1qbdF4n2yWJuK19V4dwz77 YuLKjIEmFdryg0KYasLV9P+JPhGhdukGUCwx8+pz4nMseAjJw5QGgg2rs2tOBykScZx9 u1g1lTTZMODc8E+rTge9i/yUX3b7jk2oxISic=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9lSZhmVvbZFQ0JFGH1qAy19aaezaoAC/1skwq3QhjQ8=; b=KHLHLUX+iO4V1H4IwcL5bLO/kBjLGT6y1fVURXzCjkYCMsk6QW/CHhq9VJW6zji+Jk IQ0lmOyr6TNu2KgAsaIAC6f+jJiQLBmNvu51LlYQBTgAhhl2wzop94VQ/6PhNYq4azO0 KDV0+BoFo1Avmy3WtEfon6KeulPm01pvmY1uvyMrgESa7VNLRhUWscs3xDViDQLjwowd RHFpF6wN5iBcHBReTIe9CNeqLC7sSabqTDLsyDbhkPcJtBMDY7TdMj1s9qb7tr+Qsoy5 XIjETt0gk9qlSDa303E2yBE8WPqXlmKJBp2T1hVTewInvFWtbWLlGD51A9wbPAPgj6Bg cc2Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YSiOKNoP1aaPfHxozgIqG6C7HNp8sbSIxZxf7XkCJacr+QMr0 5vqd+BujkY+HgkrKs563F8vMyUbze36T4UEMwiQouw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyFA7XLX6a5cG/pu2h1Y8NMBgqOX/BtyS0A9YugUnoBD83b5S5LJjQOR5tvSUWeSZD8VXgdIZq97XkP7E95tzc=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:51c3:: with SMTP id n3mr344431wrv.104.1597254176514; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 10:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <159620115034.32558.6249632084531225541@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAOW4vyO5v_b5_3QOKfhXupwbTk19GrpCitKfbGnff_NwYAs_+A@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCQ1z575uRwi3TJmjbcZotaq8Gkp=qBH-n9JbNtjhv4jNg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOW4vyO9ygoBt05TnxyrdbfC9FrGb8RoC5cWkjXcTphwZNbY5w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCTE9F8g3=CB0vsHUaMvcHXA52rVQKzG33fN5p9-bokf0g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+k3eCTE9F8g3=CB0vsHUaMvcHXA52rVQKzG33fN5p9-bokf0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francis Pouatcha <fpo@adorsys.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 13:42:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOW4vyO2cXTWrHz=AFN0x5FsSWtTMg3ipGWynSc7SgJ3Xgyv4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Campbell <bcampbell=40pingidentity.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cebee505acb1b757"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/LPEwQ_NaOvyHnsCEPJOIiDQODe8>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-par-03.txt
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 12 Aug 2020 17:43:01 -0000

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 1:03 PM Brian Campbell <bcampbell=
40pingidentity.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> I'm honestly having a hard time following what you are asking for. But
> there is already the following text in sec 1 that mentions non-repudiation
> via JWT-based request objects and by implication the basic request method
> does not provide non-repudiation.
>
>    The pushed authorization request endpoint fosters OAuth security by
>    providing all clients a simple means for a confidential and integrity
>    protected authorization request, but it also allows clients requiring
>    an even higher security level, especially cryptographically confirmed
>    non-repudiation, to explicitly adopt JWT-based request objects.
>
> This is what I am looking for. I did oversee this block? Thanks.
/Francis

>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 4:27 PM Francis Pouatcha <fpo=
> 40adorsys.de@dmarc.ietf..org <40adorsys.de@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
>
>> Hello Brian,
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 5:55 PM Brian Campbell <bcampbell=
>> 40pingidentity.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Francis,
>>>
>>> My apologies for the tardy response to this - I was away for some time
>>> on holiday. But thank you for the review and feedback on the draft. I've
>>> tried to respond inline below.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 5:01 PM Francis Pouatcha <fpo=
>>> 40adorsys.de@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bellow is the only remark I found from reviewing the draft draft:
>>>>
>>>> 2.1.  Request:
>>>>
>>>> requires the parameters "code_challenge" and "code_challenge_method"
>>>> but
>>>>
>>>> https://openid..net/specs/openid-financial-api-part-2-ID2.html#confidential-client
>>>> <https://openid.net/specs/openid-financial-api-part-2-ID2.html#confidential-client> mentions
>>>> that RFC7636 is not required for confidential clients. I guess those
>>>> two parameters have to be taken off the mandatory list and pushed to the
>>>> list below.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The list of parameters in Section 2.1 is qualified with a "basic
>>> parameter set will typically include" and is definitely not intended to
>>> convey a set of required parameters. It's just a list of parameters that
>>> make up a hypothetical typical request.  Perhaps some text in the section
>>> or even the formatting needs to be adjusted so as to (hopefully) avoid any
>>> confusion like this that the list somehow conveys normative requirements?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - Using jwsreq, non repudiation is provided as request is signed (jws).
>>>> This section also mentions that the request can be sent as form url
>>>> encoded (x-www-form-urlencoded). In this case, there is no way
>>>> to provide non repudiation unless we mention that request can be signed by
>>>> client using signature methods declared by the AS (AS metadata).
>>>>
>>>
>>>  I am not aware of any signature methods or means of an AS declaring
>>> support for a signature method in metadata that are sufficiently
>>> standardized to be mentioned in the context of this draft. The "request"
>>> parameter https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-par-03#section-3
>>> can be sent to the PAR endpoint and should provide the same notation of
>>> non-repudiation as does jwsreq. I think that's sufficient treatment of
>>> non-repudiation for the PAR draft.
>>>
>> This is the case when PAR uses "Content-type:
>> application/oauth.authz.req+jwt".
>>
>> This is fine as the jws form param is signed. This is also equivalent to
>> jwsreq in matter of providing non repudiation.
>>
>> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
>>
>> ...
>>
>> request=eyJraWQiOiJrMmJ.....3Gkk488RQohhgt1I0onw
>>
>>
>> This is not equivalent to jwsreq. As request body is not signed. This does not provide non repudiation.
>>
>> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
>>
>> ...
>>
>> response_type=code&
>> state=af0ifjsldkj
>>
>>
>> It is worth mentioning this in the draft
>> Best regards
>> /Francis
>>
>> --
>> Francis Pouatcha
>> Co-Founder and Technical Lead
>> adorsys GmbH & Co. KG
>> https://adorsys-platform.de/solutions/
>>
>
> *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and
> privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any
> review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited..
> If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from
> your computer. Thank you.*



-- 
Francis Pouatcha
Co-Founder and Technical Lead
adorsys GmbH & Co. KG
https://adorsys-platform.de/solutions/