IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth2 and clients without browsers

Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu@google.com> Tue, 26 July 2011 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mscurtescu@google.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 2AC7721F8640 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xbKcznZlJuUX for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636F321F8639 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.69]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p6QMTuXN010466 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:57 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1311719397; bh=I9/BltwpSPjnjnnliHWoRsMJVZw=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZMVVBpQ+lflOOSVpxaCu9hv91jagPLMRyEdkphEfoPN6TWYuzBn16zcN8LjiY62bQ 1Z8kpoR02PPlwhVbujOqQ==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date: message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=AA3HVpHHTY1mv1sFXXELNWQ9syw9nZHkfvX87q65bG5fvU3fuaNJ8+ly0kvlKqdWs W9RjTCs+JP35kJI3AHW7Q==
Received: from yih10 (yih10.prod.google.com [10.243.66.202]) by wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p6QMS66r022864 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:55 -0700
Received: by yih10 with SMTP id 10so714542yih.15 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=A3QzMB1/SewEtujPh6lSH7W+/KXVGHp3itRB46M4ymY=; b=HupZCEgp1QIPbJZq5kcuM/j/nwW6arMn79xDF27ULiv3YV/MI4McuSbn/xxedGRTu3 OVQwMExQNi1wXnOtlnlg==
Received: by 10.100.200.19 with SMTP id x19mr1440908anf.145.1311719394099; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.47.8 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:29:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAE358b5ooYa_aTozz3aswcB8Ch2KSyXyqog7x6j+sdS=P=G8fQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAE358b7heXa_Arp48H=54-A73kHMx5mmCU_GaXfwEQEkb0aZRw@mail.gmail.com> <CAE358b5ooYa_aTozz3aswcB8Ch2KSyXyqog7x6j+sdS=P=G8fQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu@google.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 18:29:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGdjJpJV+QubqZAkfgFLmHBunuFY_QPeNXh+b_J+d9JCSd4M=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth2 and clients without browsers
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: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 22:29:59 -0000

I think you are describing the device profile:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-recordon-oauth-v2-device-00

Is that correct?

Marius


On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com> wrote:
> Trying a different DL...
> --
> Andrew Arnott
> "I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
> your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> The recent OAuth 2 specs seem to omit the scenario of a client that cannot
>> host or invoke a browser but could display a URL to the user and ask the
>> user to enter a PIN.  Was this an intentional omission?  If I am correct,
>> this forces those clients to continue to use OAuth 1.0, which is not only
>> less desirable but it will limit which services they can access.
>> Thoughts?
>> --
>> Andrew Arnott
>> "I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
>> your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email