Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D on token revocation submitted

Stefanie Dronia <sDronia@gmx.de> Thu, 09 September 2010 17:52 UTC

Return-Path: <sDronia@gmx.de>
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 A0AB03A6819 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 0GmyVoOS7iTk for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DF933A6936 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 Sep 2010 17:52:37 -0000
Received: from frnk-4d009316.pool.mediaWays.net (EHLO [192.168.2.239]) [77.0.147.22] by mail.gmx.net (mp062) with SMTP; 09 Sep 2010 19:52:37 +0200
X-Authenticated: #3259608
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX194ZK5+yCt4DDAWrO/XwFHdGMP0kfaW/FIt+GrIwU hJWXc1m0sN7Ohe
Message-ID: <4C891EEA.80502@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:52:42 +0200
From: Stefanie Dronia <sDronia@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; de; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
References: <4C86BAF4.3060906@lodderstedt.net>
In-Reply-To: <4C86BAF4.3060906@lodderstedt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D on token revocation submitted
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: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:52:14 -0000

  Hallo Torsten,

first of all thanks for providing this draft on the mailing list.
Except for the following words, the draft is consistent. It defines the 
end of a token's life cycle, intended by the user.

While reading it, I think that the following part of chapter 2 (Token 
Revocation) might cause problems a a certain situation:

"If the processed token is a refresh token and the authorization
    server supports the revocation of access tokens, then the
    authorization server must also invalidate all access tokens issued
    for that refresh token."

Situation:
Authz Server(s) and Resource Server(s) are separate systems that are set 
in an open triangle (no communication between them e.g. to verify access 
tokens).

Problem:
How does the Resource Server(s) know that an access token was revoked 
and is not valid to access resources any more?
=> Communication  between the servers necessary
=> benefit of open triangle architecture are lost for this case.
I think that this is a problem with large scale systems.

Although, if there are several Authz Server(s) , then there has to be 
communication between there or a shared data base to assure that revoked 
(refresh) tokens are invalid.

=> Is this requirement really a MUST?
I don't think so.

Any thoughts?

Regards,
Stefanie




Am 08.09.2010 00:21, schrieb Torsten Lodderstedt:
>  I just submited the first version of my I-D for token revocation.
>
> Link: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lodderstedt-oauth-revocation/
>
> The I-D proposes an additional endpoint, which can be used to revoke 
> both refresh and access tokens. The objective is to enhance OAuth 
> security by giving clients and users explicite control of the 
> finalization of the token life cycle, e.g. to implement application 
> logout or access authorization removal.
>
> Please take the time to review the document (2 pages, essentially) and 
> give me feedback. My goal is that this draft becomes a working group 
> document.
>
> regards,
> Torsten.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>