Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07.txt
Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com> Tue, 28 March 2017 06:32 UTC
Return-Path: <sakimura@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 AD53A128B4E for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 I0ulsJpOn48t for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (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 1B3A6126BF6 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id x35so56224143qtc.2 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:48 -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=Sylfaai/WsOEk+lK7+QRtWba8M2o8vNRJhH6YL0u55A=; b=T9F9cwne3qxrbMGE9F9mGSBVaIaU+2X/g3CT8/90sGkAj7Jo4770bfDuOIBPWPSfzN yvOKbpsqQn2MxJtgHYtRhyCS4DkH7NuSRc3XKEEwVXoLSKC11CVAW5tUYVRwwppmjqcZ 6SYkvwQtpbLeuJLymb4DkIHiqEw9RvDUW9SXVUzlj/5Ycf9i1V4FGUgkQpw3wg3nO0kE 5zXojdn2D2/xyF3yREhH3kuJ+NcuHfCdc+W5Koo2x0lCf+2u65mqHOoW6U1ljYnTi7wF 7l0N7+7tPApRy93kzjyGtFfbh6k0zc5uG+VTALBTJyE9+qM7cMg1wzxEkEweFjQFQ+da 0uDw==
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=Sylfaai/WsOEk+lK7+QRtWba8M2o8vNRJhH6YL0u55A=; b=h5EpCETsYQ2yhZSYMX0UMeTpFlsgZ9wS6XHaA1V9R37vheo03qY6HkG4CXXxcnDxgP Z6BUMr25kf7RAq1GxPQgkYfUqUcyocve67i92TVINnMGWKvDdNcO3mcocgM4QpqT2IgR cdkBE6CirUV1Z1Y6IzBd7SWZ5qdnZS20gkKnWCREXvv5NrSbv442RJXyZsXu3jAdCl/K ljR+NnKgeT8DLnEdFAJtXFeP0IBY++uMXjRzWiSswj1IUG9HUsElkzmMIZ+P8w31NRqC XBy3ZxM/nptYKDyILpRtGLYDnv7LOxT5dKqliQU1yEbPPfZGmRKNXEpFF16W46kR5HNV dUlQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1nSsmLxleqAALjsNGhgeClO+6X8C0lMBL4GYlmtRBFmYhgi2vyIJSaiuZ3ge7UA2abUVubQLOkY0Ur4w==
X-Received: by 10.200.43.85 with SMTP id 21mr23795643qtv.81.1490682766972; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <148416124213.8244.5842562779051799977.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+k3eCTE1NM90QcZRFR0jATCqdeJWyTRUb6Ryp52n9FRg6aGpA@mail.gmail.com> <9199091B-5D7F-4D66-9EC5-CB0EF2D3CF6D@lodderstedt.net> <CA+k3eCTjmifjsbec80vGTE5Hw4ws7oARuaatDk4RYOLK26-87Q@mail.gmail.com> <CY4PR21MB050479DBD8A7AB6342682209F5330@CY4PR21MB0504.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <30B37ED3-6E3B-4739-9917-BDEC198CA027@lodderstedt.net>
In-Reply-To: <30B37ED3-6E3B-4739-9917-BDEC198CA027@lodderstedt.net>
From: Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:32:36 +0000
Message-ID: <CABzCy2ArQ29xtyzT+t4i1fq9XZT+fMLgsw5oV75aFTkvVf8tgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
Cc: oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114087f0cc7705054bc4a0fc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/dm54GeIK7LxWWnItOCvV8VW8WRE>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07.txt
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:32:51 -0000
There are cases where tokens are supposed to be consumed at multiple places and the `aud` needed to capture them. That's why `aud` is a multi-valued field. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:35 AM Torsten Lodderstedt < torsten@lodderstedt.net> wrote: > May I ask you to explain this reason? > > Am 27.03.2017 um 08:48 schrieb Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>: > > For the same reason that the “aud” claim is multi-valued in JWTs, the > audience needs to stay multi-valued in Token Exchange. Ditto for resources. > > > > Thanks, > > -- Mike > > > > *From:* OAuth [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org <oauth-bounces@ietf.org>] *On > Behalf Of *Brian Campbell > *Sent:* Monday, March 27, 2017 8:45 AM > *To:* Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net> > *Cc:* oauth <oauth@ietf.org> > *Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07.txt > > > > Thanks for the review and question, Torsten. > > The desire to support multiple audience/resource values in the request > came up during a review and discussion among the authors of the document > when preparing the -03 draft. As I recall, it was said that both Salesforce > and Microsoft had use-cases for it. I incorporated support for it into the > draft acting in the role of editor. > > From an individual perspective, I tend to agree with you that allowing for > multiple audiences/resources adds a lot of complexity that's like not > needed in many (or most) cases. And I would personally be open to making > audience and resource mutual exclusive and single valued. A question for > the WG I suppose. > > The "invalid_target" error code that was added in -07 was intended to give > the AS a standard way to deal with the complexity and reject request with > multiple audiences/resources that it doesn't understand or is unwilling or > unable to process. It was intended as a compromise, of sorts, to allow for > the multiples but provide an easy out of saying it can't be supported based > on whatever implementation or policy of the AS. > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt < > torsten@lodderstedt.net> wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > > > thanks for the clarification around resource, audience and scope. > > > > Here are my comments on the draft: > > > > In section 2.1 it states: „Multiple "resource" parameters may be used to > indicate > > that the issued token is intended to be used at the multiple > > resources listed.“ > > > > Can you please explain the rational in more detail? I don’t understand why > there is a need to ask for access tokens, which are good for multiple > resources at once. This is a request type more or less exclusively used in > server to server scenarios, right? So the only reason I can think of is > call reduction. > > > > On the other side, this feature increases the AS's complexity, e.g. its > policy may prohibit to issue tokens for multiple resources in general or > the particular set the client is asking for. How shall the AS handles such > cases? > > > > And it is getting even more complicated given there could also be multiple > audience values and the client could mix them: > > > > "Multiple "audience" parameters > > may be used to indicate that the issued token is intended to be > > used at the multiple audiences listed. The "audience" and > > "resource" parameters may be used together to indicate multiple > > target services with a mix of logical names and physical > > locations.“ > > > > And in the end the client may add some scope values to the „meal“, which > brings us to > > > > „Effectively, the requested access rights of the > > token are the cartesian product of all the scopes at all the target > > services." > > > > I personally would suggest to drop support for multiple audience and > resource parameters and make audience and resource mutual exclusive. I > think this is sufficient and much easier to implement. > > > > kind regards, > > Torsten. > > > > > > Am 11.01.2017 um 20:04 schrieb Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com > >: > > > > Draft -07 of "OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange" has been published. The primary > change in -07 is the addition of a description of the relationship between > audience/resource/scope, which was a request or comment that came up during > the f2f meeting in Seoul. > > Excerpted from the Document History: > > -07 > > o Fixed typo (desecration -> discretion). > o Added an explanation of the relationship between scope, audience > and resource in the request and added an "invalid_target" error > code enabling the AS to tell the client that the requested > audiences/resources were too broad. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org> > Date: Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:00 PM > Subject: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07.txt > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: oauth@ietf.org > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol of the IETF. > > Title : OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange > Authors : Michael B. Jones > Anthony Nadalin > Brian Campbell > John Bradley > Chuck Mortimore > Filename : draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07.txt > Pages : 31 > Date : 2017-01-11 > > Abstract: > This specification defines a protocol for an HTTP- and JSON- based > Security Token Service (STS) by defining how to request and obtain > security tokens from OAuth 2.0 authorization servers, including > security tokens employing impersonation and delegation. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange/ > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-07 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > -- Nat Sakimura Chairman of the Board, OpenID Foundation
- [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token-exc… internet-drafts
- [OAUTH-WG] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-toke… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Mike Jones
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Nat Sakimura
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Denis
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Denis
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Denis
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Denis
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-token… Brian Campbell