Re: [OAUTH-WG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-oauth-device-flow-09.txt> (OAuth 2.0 Device Flow for Browserless and Input Constrained Devices) to Proposed Standard

Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com> Thu, 31 May 2018 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <bcampbell@pingidentity.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 40F3212EB12 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:50:20 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pingidentity.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 TaXBY8LjIkJU for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:50:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x241.google.com (mail-qt0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::241]) (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 1D47F12E8DC for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x241.google.com with SMTP id q6-v6so28657300qtn.3 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pingidentity.com; s=gmail; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ahsGHJ1QWdO4abM498bbFD+dGLFBrKqAx9QNyG41x+g=; b=TInNo+yWpmIrTQvIJKVGpaja84VUWOS3iFnnz3vn1j7WThsmn+GMe81ZCEKo8kR9gX CZqh+CIqBaUKznDni16QxD7LYPQmVn9LkO6cUfosniVxxEWZo8sr0omO5HH65qZMdzhX LF9lXWb9YCUm5cKZJEmCXJwjhYqrLgb4g1mtI=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ahsGHJ1QWdO4abM498bbFD+dGLFBrKqAx9QNyG41x+g=; b=IyIrprtzToWvw9MigMDWqIrZXVyG15NbAH7wup+wKpZXkNPGsiiNYU6r/LJtr5jaET ppJ199yH+MXxpgKjUqTXi6N2egpOdaEM7S8XrUnJNyXa1F32Zwu/DM3K+4eAw0/lsqKn Aw0OUTTJotMylI28C4eLZmr3uMDA/Rrc7Ifqt1lc+p5YFyo+UZL1UyNuCk44oa7AUysC pC485Cz4UOpZ0p8ju9VghBsbt3emxhGO11nJi8+u9bFwBptWV7jEOcy1E9zL+j4JTsSR Rgv4aF1/3ua1tEduNs4g7v/711wlX+fcFCCDyU6sjALcNxk7oj3SHgMDxOaRAWRP8JXA 1UvQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3J28uaMe0lU3XIXn0NqpPbJV32eL4RCEMTrmWSI1ASxFiptq+b L87zR2n6gZGY0tpyz3tDUi2gYFjCdBUlIkRz/ZBJjMcj7wHtGXa7lFVRYwRoE5Miq+jPwR78PYG mzy1UrY3GAMTzIw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLyG7Uu5aVBZ+FfN9RiVoeEVoRTdur/QeM8t8YrafYaVCishzf8+Sxitge7jHRIb/XfZpMEggIJA40mPIyBx0I=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:1ca:: with SMTP id b10-v6mr7372750qtg.360.1527785406051; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:aed:22e1:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAP42hAwPdvNX1Hr=dvPwghQcP_iHvbHvS_aXtKGf1uGfLidSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <152763243091.27698.7723369435827878398.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAEqOSkfwdn-+1zFBgpgk3Mr6HYy-OvKNdVRKZtdP9c6HVHC60Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAAP42hAA8FC8B8bhDdCAg=5TnDjZXr76UiMLNABEG23GRFdeyQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEqOSkcquQ4GXhhOV30TsOEYSV5fuG_PtO7TFo_pE_zVAJd0zA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAP42hBznvLPe8JLy1HYxFQ2bWxGW5mbpa8hcAv6K8jM3EkQxw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+k3eCQ5xxj4nCUBvQn1QwUEL-ouLiZgean02rFwEjC6dcz9mw@mail.gmail.com> <CAAP42hAwPdvNX1Hr=dvPwghQcP_iHvbHvS_aXtKGf1uGfLidSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:49:35 -0600
Message-ID: <CA+k3eCQH_+a4duxo1q3zXPAsYOpVLnBcx5c09xTg4w1GJuP-0w@mail.gmail.com>
To: William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>
Cc: William Denniss <wdenniss=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Andrew Sciberras <andrewsciberras@pingidentity.com>, draft-ietf-oauth-device-flow@ietf.org, oauth-chairs@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006bd1c2056d834205"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/hpp3bpAo4g3JaFNjY9_wUneoHog>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-oauth-device-flow-09.txt> (OAuth 2.0 Device Flow for Browserless and Input Constrained Devices) to Proposed Standard
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: Thu, 31 May 2018 16:50:28 -0000

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 6:06 PM, William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>
wrote:

>
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Brian Campbell <
> bcampbell@pingidentity.com> wrote:
>
>> I realize this is somewhat pedantic but I don't think referencing 4.1.2.1
>> works given how RFC 6749 set things up. Rather I believe that the device
>> flow needs to define and register "access_denied" as a valid token
>> endpoint
>> response error code (it's not a token endpoint response error per RFC 6749
>> sec 5.2 nor has it been registered https://www.iana.org/assignmen
>> ts/oauth-parameters/oauth-parameters.xhtml#extensions-error
>> <https://www.iana.org/assignments/oauth-parameters/oauth-parameters.xhtml#extensions-error>
>> ).  Also
>> invalid_grant is a a token endpoint response error from RFC 6749 sec 5.2
>> so
>> that reference is needed and appropriate. RFC 6749 Sec 4.1.2.1
>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6749#section-4.1.2> defines errors
>> returned
>> from the authorization endpoint. But the device flow errors are from the
>> token endpoint.
>>
>>
> Yes, that's true. It's still the token endpoint, so 5.2 does in fact
> apply, it's just we're mixing in authorization-style actions which were not
> previously considered/used for that endpoint.
>
> Do you have any proposed text to resolve this?
>
>

Sure, here's a crack at some text/changes:


Add this to the list of error codes in section 3.5.:

        "access_denied
               The end-user denied the authorization request."


And add this to section 7.2.1.:

  "o  Error name: access_denied
   o  Error usage location: Token endpoint response
   o  Related protocol extension: [[ this specification ]]
   o  Change controller: IETF
   o  Specification Document: Section 3.5 of [[ this specification ]]"


I might also slightly change this text in section 3.5:

"In addition to the error codes defined in Section 5.2 of [RFC6749],
   the following error codes are specific for the device flow:"

to

"In addition to the error codes defined in Section 5.2 of [RFC6749],
   the following error codes are specified by the device flow:"

so that the wording doesn't read as prohibiting the error codes from being
used outside the device flow (access_denied from the token endpoint might
well be useful for other grant types).


And add "Andrew Sciberras" to the Acknowledgements.

-- 
_CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged 
material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, 
distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately 
by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your 
computer. Thank you._