Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server
Antonio Sanso <asanso@adobe.com> Fri, 27 September 2013 08:33 UTC
Return-Path: <asanso@adobe.com>
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 6951B11E8137 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.617
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.617 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.982, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M+Tl4ZeMMY1d for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod6og127.obsmtp.com (exprod6og127.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED95C11E80D1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com ([192.150.11.134]) by exprod6ob127.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUkVC0thJvFnD9Z/EF4nmzkvl4RQgZmH4@postini.com; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:26 PDT
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r8R8ThiH007107; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nahub01.corp.adobe.com (nahub01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.97]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id r8R8XL6A016890; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eurcas01.eur.adobe.com (10.128.4.27) by nahub01.corp.adobe.com (10.8.189.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:33:20 -0700
Received: from [10.132.1.66] (10.132.1.66) by eurcas01.eur.adobe.com (10.128.4.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.327.1; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 09:33:18 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Antonio Sanso <asanso@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: <524429D2.3010008@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:33:13 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <04F773FD-E099-4FB6-9BB0-6E5F910EA205@adobe.com>
References: <832FA2A6-D0DD-45D0-9107-7EE02B6793B7@adobe.com> <524429D2.3010008@gmail.com>
To: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:33:32 -0000
On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24/09/13 13:08, Antonio Sanso wrote: >> Hi *, >> >> apologis to be back to this argument :). >> >> Let me try to better explain one use case that IMHO would be really good to have in the OAuth specification family :) >> >> At the moment the only "OAuth standard" way I know to do OAuth server to server is to use [0] namely Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant. >> >> Let me tell I am not a big fun of this particular flow :) (but this is another story). >> >> An arguable better way to solve this scenario is to user (and why not to standardise :S?) the method used by Google (or a variant of it) see [1]. > > 2-way TLS and Resource Owner Password Credentials should be secure > enough, right ? > secure is secure what I do not like of that flow though is the fact that the resource owner should give the AS username/password to the client regards antonio > Cheers, Sergey >> >> Couple of more things: >> >> - I do not know if Google would be interested to put some effort to standardise it (is anybody from Google lurking :) e.g.Tim Bray :D ) >> - I am not too familiar with IETF process. Would the OAuth WG take in consideration such proposal draft?? >> >> Thanks and regards >> >> Antonio >> >> [0] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6749#section-4.3 >> [1] https://developers.google.com/accounts/docs/OAuth2ServiceAccount >> _______________________________________________ >> 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-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Chuck Mortimore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Bill Mills
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Phil Hunt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Chuck Mortimore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Chuck Mortimore
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Sergey Beryozkin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Todd W Lainhart
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Sergey Beryozkin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Oauth Server to Server Antonio Sanso