IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] "shared symmetric secret"

"Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org> Tue, 13 July 2010 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <jricher@mitre.org>
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 D9ACC3A6B4F for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.201, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 rfi8snETSbUy for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (smtp-bedford.mitre.org [129.83.20.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AC853A6A30 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o6DInXUD017462 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:49:33 -0400
Received: from imchub1.MITRE.ORG (imchub1.mitre.org [129.83.29.73]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o6DInXcQ017459; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:49:33 -0400
Received: from IMCMBX3.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.206]) by imchub1.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.73]) with mapi; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:49:32 -0400
From: "Richer, Justin P." <jricher@mitre.org>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>, John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:46:41 -0400
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] "shared symmetric secret"
Thread-Index: AcsisFeeMlAR4wQoQcWPqGFUYa2sOwAAi6BAAAJNZ48=
Message-ID: <D24C564ACEAD16459EF2526E1D7D605D0C9E7F3576@IMCMBX3.MITRE.ORG>
References: <97BD2762-F147-4774-9557-AD478338B348@jkemp.net>, <C861F32E.371BA%eran@hueniverse.com>
In-Reply-To: <C861F32E.371BA%eran@hueniverse.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] "shared symmetric secret"
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, 13 Jul 2010 18:49:26 -0000

>> I would be very unhappy if we equated access tokens with passwords.
>>
>> I agree with Dirk that "capability" is a more expressive phrase than either
>> "shared secret" or "password".

> Expressive to you and people well-versed in security theory. It means
> nothing to a casual reader. The token definition includes the term, but in
> this section, it is referring to how an access token is used, and it is used
> just like a password.

 Definitely agree with Eran here. The term "capability" doesn't mean much to me in this circumstance, but "like a password" tells me exactly what I, as an implementer, can expect. 

 -- Justin

v2.40.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status