Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT binding for OAuth 2.0

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Tue, 14 April 2015 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E64251A6F30 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 WQmyyDQVFSe2 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-f170.google.com (mail-qk0-f170.google.com [209.85.220.170]) (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 D8F331A6F20 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qku63 with SMTP id 63so41788447qku.3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=FBuOeizz4EuSGLMZMXEfoTL8E9XNTQeKluLdHAosMsY=; b=RJuhsKpeJFkFLpkqFnizfXwfqPfQzf6g5szsT8u2Lcp7v3rqWS4Wr2+H6NfKzRhZ5h bEsp6zo//NwjljY7S3LEsTDn1PXfv2d4yVrcqxUaWw9N9ofpRsUFL/WDoxqB05VNF1hx 5VN7zxCvXRzpDOiFiAwiCKYQ1kvGLtxydeNbZASLZWoHvQjz14O3+Q0MCcOH3QiUBxUG OgeJ9a9HFncq/q8RsEfdGo6fF1jhiJGBRyubQmDdB0fyssJ3x7Vz6RfFeroF7jQc1q7w uIWBScwnymBpyZsFp2VYPeYHo7o4xxngcANRv0A7AdxFPZvueVs6BpfeTzCkXLnIm1nT IlCg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlawBzRrPnIrWyLz8IBwdPh2k8xXLgX90MF1rZ9lwN7GSUahOlpVMPS2KfeFfDRoJrA6jP/
X-Received: by 10.140.237.67 with SMTP id i64mr27722304qhc.86.1429048556744; Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.216] (181-163-76-154.baf.movistar.cl. [181.163.76.154]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q64sm342011qkh.33.2015.04.14.14.55.55 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_273B14D5-C9F6-4E49-974A-FD2D76336C96"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJV9qO8KJk07Hs7X0tE2UKxeQNA3XaQO2uOF5xfVz0eDd8RgrA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 18:55:42 -0300
Message-Id: <422C5670-7D2D-4E1C-9E06-74CCB9054260@ve7jtb.com>
References: <CAJV9qO-PsiNOdfBAf9k0VJ7+eGkE_g_gbygdCbGMv2UT56Ld=g@mail.gmail.com> <A0FFB94C-1EDB-41B9-B1E2-6943B078145F@ve7jtb.com> <CAJV9qO8KJk07Hs7X0tE2UKxeQNA3XaQO2uOF5xfVz0eDd8RgrA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Prabath Siriwardena <prabath@wso2.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/f0DXDZI5Ytt9Pvo2djXiw728v6Y>
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org WG" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT binding for OAuth 2.0
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 14 Apr 2015 21:56:21 -0000

Most of the pub sub things I have seen use HTTP transport.  Do you have a pointer to the protocol?

> On Apr 14, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Prabath Siriwardena <prabath@wso2.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks John for the pointer - will have look..
> 
> I am looking this for a pub/sub scenario..  Having JWT binding would benefit that..
> 
> Also - why I want access token to be inside a JWT is - when we send a JSON payload in this case, we already have the JWT envelope and the access token needs to be carried inside..
> 
> Thanks & regards,
> -Prabath
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:41 PM, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com <mailto:ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>> wrote:
> There is a OAuth binding to SASL https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-kitten-sasl-oauth-19 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-kitten-sasl-oauth-19>
> 
> Google supports it for IMAP/SMTP,  I think the latest iOS and OSX mail client updates use it rather than passwords for Google.
> I also noticed Outlook on Android using it.
> 
> The access token might be a signed or encrypted JWT itself.  I don’t know that wrapping it again necessarily helps.
> 
> Yes we should have bindings to other non http protocols.  
> 
> Is there something specific that you are looking for that is not covered by SASL?
> 
> John B.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 14, 2015, at 6:21 PM, Prabath Siriwardena <prabath@wso2.com <mailto:prabath@wso2.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> At the moment we only HTTP binding to transport the access token (please correct me if not)..
>> 
>> This creates a dependency on the transport.
>> 
>> How about creating a JWT binding for OAuth 2.0..? We can transport the access token as an encrypted JWT header parameter..?
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Prabath
>> 
>> Twitter : @prabath
>> LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/prabathsiriwardena <http://www.linkedin.com/in/prabathsiriwardena>
>> 
>> Mobile : +1 650 625 7950 <tel:%2B1%20650%20625%207950>
>> 
>> http://blog.facilelogin.com <http://blog.facilelogin.com/>
>> http://blog.api-security.org <http://blog.api-security.org/>_______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> OAuth@ietf.org <mailto:OAuth@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Prabath
> 
> Twitter : @prabath
> LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/prabathsiriwardena <http://www.linkedin.com/in/prabathsiriwardena>
> 
> Mobile : +1 650 625 7950
> 
> http://blog.facilelogin.com <http://blog.facilelogin.com/>
> http://blog.api-security.org <http://blog.api-security.org/>