Re: [OAUTH-WG] First draft of OAuth 2.0

Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com> Wed, 24 March 2010 00:15 UTC

Return-Path: <cmortimore@salesforce.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 0E76D3A69EF for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.868
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.868 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_17=0.6, 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 u-V3-MX17C7p for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod8og111.obsmtp.com (exprod8og111.obsmtp.com [64.18.3.22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 774E83A694C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([204.14.239.239]) by exprod8ob111.postini.com ([64.18.7.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKS6lZpglSBubkTFCBVAZzovFCpTyPPqxR@postini.com; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:35 PDT
Received: from EXSFM-MB01.internal.salesforce.com ([10.1.127.45]) by exsfm-hub4.internal.salesforce.com ([10.1.127.8]) with mapi; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:34 -0700
From: Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com>
To: Paul Madsen <paul.madsen@gmail.com>, "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:15:33 -0700
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] First draft of OAuth 2.0
Thread-Index: AcrKtTkwdGxigd+ZSEWCqL9U7s0kiAAMeU7b
Message-ID: <C7CEA7B5.2940%cmortimore@salesforce.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BA905A5.1080106@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C7CEA7B52940cmortimoresalesforcecom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] First draft of OAuth 2.0
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: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:15:23 -0000

Outside the scope of what this WG should be tackling in the core spec IMO, but I'd be interested in working on a profile.   There is a lot of this use-case being done in an ad-hoc manner on my platform.

-cmort


On 3/23/10 11:17 AM, "Paul Madsen" <paul.madsen@gmail.com> wrote:

Separate from the Client trading a SAML assertion for an Access Token as
in this flow, we are interested in defining how a Client might use SAML
SSO messages to get an Access Token (comparable to OpenID/OAuth hybrid).

Anybody else interested?

paul

On 3/23/2010 1:47 PM, David Recordon wrote:
> Hey Chuck,
> Thanks for rewriting the SAML flow into the style of my draft!  I
> really appreciate it.
>
> I originally dropped the SAML flow because I hadn't seen support for
> it on the mailing list(s) the past two months.  I think that our
> default should be making the spec as short and simple as possible so
> removed a few things from WRAP in order to start conversations like
> this one.  It's now clear that Google, Microsoft, Salesforce, and IBM
> all need the SAML profile.  Chuck, I'll merge your wording in.  Want
> to be listed as an author?
>
> We're also going to need to figure out which flows should be in the
> core spec versus which should be developed at the same time but in
> individual documents.
>
> Thanks,
> --David
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt
> <torsten@lodderstedt.net>  wrote:
>
>> +1 for assertion support
>>
>> what about enhancing the flow #2.4 to accept any kind of user credentials
>> (username/password, SAML assertions, other authz servers tokens)
>>
>> regards,
>> Torsten.
>>
>> Am 23.03.2010 um 12:42 schrieb Mark Mcgloin<mark.mcgloin@ie.ibm.com>:
>>
>>
>>> +1 for assertion profile. Was there any reason why it was dropped?
>>>
>>> On 3/23/10, Chuck Mortimore wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just getting a chance to review this - I apologize for not getting this
>>>>
>>> before the meeting started.
>>>
>>>
>>>> We'd like to see some form of an Assertion Profile, similar to section
>>>> 5.2
>>>>
>>> from draft-hardt-oauth-01.   We have strong customer use-cases for an
>>> assertion based flow, specifically SAML bearer tokens, and I>believe
>>> Microsoft may have already shipped a minor variation on this ( wrap_SAML )
>>> in Azure.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark McGloin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>
>
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth