Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.1 - drop implicit flow?

Jared Jennings <jaredljennings@gmail.com> Wed, 18 March 2020 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <jaredljennings@gmail.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 6DB693A154F for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 06:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 bwX__ly237UB for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 06:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52b.google.com (mail-ed1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) (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 B7F243A154C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 06:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id ca19so30800690edb.13 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 06:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RFDKwJViwxall5K2IVo3u54W+7H95rInlf+RObYuOVM=; b=ud1yPzwz/qlo2YMYvZP9b716ihmCR1pSgg1Uh659aCp2HxJIw7R1EDkko/UBjqJ0yt U2LcCcx9G01+MBb9nmM7V+8zO/uimZLXVefvMvLaH+sLZ43bwTuDy8qstn22k5TqCMDq maILp/gSeQCgnsKwSuaa8j4fA10xksyD2Ilm1YKu95b3X/XwkIrVUApnBk5oJj4H+rqi R0x3UBvKZpOvgYgyAORr5+fnwxX5j0lLBkv9Mvf+8YEUCupFlCO3y4rh5jVmzJ4VUkSW R3icN348IPnY/MQkVvIHYCHEdse7950bWPioIw27JKK+hd2JZYoIHWwwXVEJw6FtEFwY OVrA==
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=RFDKwJViwxall5K2IVo3u54W+7H95rInlf+RObYuOVM=; b=I3lX25o/jXqQ9lgYujjNOH/ROQ8rx1C7oQVXB04u2Qfb8yfvu1s0oNtqzcil5lMtmR s/zW1oc0BXPMyYMsKGj8R1mHe9RZoYK/BlrlvKAIjfVT4+WAp2mE3r8O9xEpwVfxfs4c dRejNOzrkvzxH8kjdomvqyIzXD/X9YIlJSzCEi8YQpoaNxiNIlx/ymcAbW+CAxS332nZ pGRDl7cEn5jbSizE0fF7S0EBaKhCq9ERyBbNwFP07qglksy77s/kJ3/leHjNTgZySvQb Aw+M4prw46YO1gshPMn2AnTQryGLe7j+CaNin9aUww8DwPh/wR5Jfo0A1k/Mobv4VK1u xW1A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3ohcr3A43+xhQtARfNbS9VOUg9RyF6QIEJrPsPuqfdlAd15aEs G20+M/g4x2P2wZ4Caj/kFIwbYeR8EHrHDnq322Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vvnbSt03uPbHTEHoxXnoe0PN2XhyUvoMyyNF+f9?= =?utf-8?q?y5F07OOb1OnOeayZN3JMzUVeZAFg3FwuQmnSMRF/rFf7jZ0=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:ce85:: with SMTP id y5mr3788368edv.198.1584536599885; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 06:03:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD9ie-s9HT=9MKPK+GpVngZc+9QMxHS6KL-Sfq-UPQz2VQ3ioA@mail.gmail.com> <3F805BA8-8ABB-4939-96CC-FD2FEC811322@lodderstedt.net> <CAD9ie-sZOG0=pbFW72fZR3XtzsNFRFCyFmF5xeEPFUzHzdmHaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCRJMtAstvrNKPE4qAqU7TCFytrCZC8tHtupWno_J0xKbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD9ie-uiLS=f1QrHyQAAaq2YP=gPVFCtOawbKXwh4xG8adw=vQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCQGqduvcOi_S6cp49NUkr4Rt1ws7Lb6t3SvVgceaHKbOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAO_FVe4B45fQjOtUtFw+nthLn3RtaivPik9jHkC8Fqu1C3ovZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMVRk+JCruWcpp96iDVdCpLVo4pZkn312b48L9xbbb0b0BVaAQ@mail.gmail.com> <C931D7DE-DD10-4BAB-852B-3F7151839E0A@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <C931D7DE-DD10-4BAB-852B-3F7151839E0A@mit.edu>
From: Jared Jennings <jaredljennings@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 08:03:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMVRk+K9H9K0JcQYqkM5CHEn6eRLvb=ziZ4uQN2r0eNqxusroQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
Cc: Vittorio Bertocci <Vittorio=40auth0.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Brian Campbell <bcampbell=40pingidentity.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002b7e1305a120ad8e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/RE5zH_SmG10MRrqYfXwGirkJJXY>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.1 - drop implicit flow?
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, 18 Mar 2020 13:03:29 -0000

Perfect, and really good info! but most people, if we need to worry about
the audience, are not going to put that together. They just read "OAUTH".
It's not a deal breaker, but if the document is going to be easy to read
and keep confusion to a minimum... then it would be nice if it addressed
concepts like this that might seem obvious to you.

Granted, I am coming at this from a consultant perspective who works with a
lot of companies who have architects that barely understand these
technologies, but are implementing them for the enterprise.

-Jared
Skype:jaredljennings
Signal:+1 816.730.9540
WhatsApp: +1 816.678.4152


On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 7:55 AM Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:

> OpenID Connect is based on OAuth 2.0, not on OAuth 2.1. Therefore, it
> would not be affected at all, whether through the hybrid or implicit flows.
>
> If OIDC pushes a revision to OAuth 2.1, then it would be bound by the
> features of OAuth 2.1 and would need to contend with that. But until that
> happens, everything we do with OAuth 2.1 has literally no effect on OAuth
> 2.0 systems, including OIDC.
>
>  — Justin
>
>