Re: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-pop-key-distribution-01 and Open Issues

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Actually, I am not sure my statement below is actually correct.

We need to distinguish the case where the client id is unique per client
software instance and when it isn't.

If the client id is shared by multiple client software instances then
how do we make sure that clients aren't uploading keys that either have
no kid or have an kid that is not unique (since they don't know about
the existence of other client instances or that other client instances
have already uploaded a jwk with the same kid).

Any idea how to address that problem?

Ciao
Hannes

On 03/05/2015 01:43 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> that's a good idea. However, the dynamic client registration should
> state that the "kid" parameter is used and must be included in the JWK
> (since the kid is an optional parameter).
> 
> The key name is then the 'kid' plus the client id since the value of the
> kid is not unique by itself.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> On 03/05/2015 12:54 PM, John Bradley wrote:
>> For signing authentication requests you include the keyid in the JWT, and the AS looks in the JWKS to find the correct key if there is more than one.
>>
>> I don't think that is a problem
>>
>> What we probably need to do is pass a keyid in the request if there is more than one signing key registered for the client.
>>
>> John B.
>