Re: [OAUTH-WG] First Draft of OAuth 2.1

Vittorio Bertocci <Vittorio@auth0.com> Thu, 12 March 2020 18:24 UTC

Return-Path: <vittorio.bertocci@auth0.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 7DE283A0F10 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=auth0.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 k3H7XJ9gGvpu for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2a.google.com (mail-io1-xd2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2a]) (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 AA9363A0F1A for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2a.google.com with SMTP id m25so6686652ioo.8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=auth0.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7VoOb7bkMpURAQBWl38pgac/wjd5YwocPM2SaU/x/0Q=; b=JrCfuoFG34vR9QChtxY/ybhG0Ff9hReZmVRp4+sSp2xVv6G9TEAjSH2y10xRsXeln6 WnnsiC0SBtbjywWRoJiS1O89H27rCmVM4SL+s8r9TFhmrM9FlLDiiC0x2QbrW+bKgDK0 kMx+sVyXtVkVPVW4m/ttpu9fJLsL5/s86DSBezriWXc0lBVweGdwa4sR652QKdiprKN1 mIqa/UjqKgpB/+3Nwc++pgcUJv7nKSmZwzdYjB5VnkiNMGmvdqoaT4wzjNCflXFADMhv 7TFL1SYTNzlJ9nnRTuxxjJtu/I9tLK8t+l+tkroq6Lu4g96eh3P8u01kbo8uoTNgFWqI wk2w==
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=7VoOb7bkMpURAQBWl38pgac/wjd5YwocPM2SaU/x/0Q=; b=rHg1tZWXh0lvBtIyqLx/W2ngLMO5uxS+Zo/1uV4Rn6hnLigPH04Ep1JYrMnFfoLs+c 8l4/phwnNWL1UsScDmps0hDPht2vS195sIjDHzxMkku8/hUs3Mh18YMRlXTFKcqvzHAR 4OSQ9jJWfTgr1cVOuJjCf0nHAk+c63Yi/WExH+pElDPdec7w3g5o3n1dZ4gqdE4s/mX9 WL7Xl3zSRGirnLL8xrRPGAIgNoPK8lMtf/7W8tcOMVYkb/l1Rqq5ByEVM1bou5/sHS0e GL01ikhOdcTEKRqtbDLHKoSUcP1mo1757mqWTgzd7kMOqC/6OTUQnikvN8gNVw/plnTW bGng==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3m/x0YGok5WW5idTKhPfJ75gZfL45mTs31aN6NpaD2PoTYv8ll nFV8EHFJ4JlAaKihrWipicVUGDlV2GqHJQ/sQcucFPjI
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vsF/xS309P0uXMxpEEOk4+moW1pJMfYmoLtauHJ?= =?utf-8?q?41Fv4EBjVKt+Pn6fLRop9E1/DxWQWlCi7cNTwAfRPT+c8sA=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:2402:: with SMTP id f2mr8800370jaa.135.1584037468642; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAGBSGjp6xRL21fdY+dosAhwS3Db6z1hxHU5uPGGprC-c_Ec-Cg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGBSGjp6xRL21fdY+dosAhwS3Db6z1hxHU5uPGGprC-c_Ec-Cg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vittorio Bertocci <Vittorio@auth0.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:24:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CAO_FVe40ONas2em6gGviEgdh_bf4qG+PnQD+G+KR+QPcY+V8Bw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Parecki <aaron@parecki.com>
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a155fd05a0ac763f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/kI__C9vZF5eiV5CKF33-gIoHRX4>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] First Draft of OAuth 2.1
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 12 Mar 2020 18:24:32 -0000

Hey guys,
thanks for putting this together.
I am concerned with the real world impact of imposing sender constraint |
rotation as a MUST on refresh tokens in every scenario.
Sender constraint isn't immediately actionable - we just had the discussion
for dPOP, hence I won't go in the details here.
Rotation isn't something that can be added without significant impact on
development and runtime experiences:

   - on distributed scenarios, it introduces the need to serialize access
   to shared caches
   - network failures can lead to impact on experience- stranding clients
   which fail to receive RTn+1 during RTn redemption in a limbo where user
   interaction might become necessary, disrupting experience or functionality
   for scenarios where the user isn't available to respond.
   -



On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:28 PM Aaron Parecki <aaron@parecki.com> wrote:

> I'm happy to share that Dick and Torsten and I have published a first
> draft of OAuth 2.1. We've taken the feedback from the discussions on
> the list and incorporated that into the draft.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-parecki-oauth-v2-1-01
>
> A summary of the differences between this draft and OAuth 2.0 can be
> found in section 12, and I've copied them here below.
>
> > This draft consolidates the functionality in OAuth 2.0 (RFC6749),
> > OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps (RFC8252), Proof Key for Code Exchange
> > (RFC7636), OAuth 2.0 for Browser-Based Apps
> > (I-D.ietf-oauth-browser-based-apps), OAuth Security Best Current
> > Practice (I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics), and Bearer Token Usage
> > (RFC6750).
> >
> >   Where a later draft updates or obsoletes functionality found in the
> >   original [RFC6749], that functionality in this draft is updated with
> >   the normative changes described in a later draft, or removed
> >   entirely.
> >
> >   A non-normative list of changes from OAuth 2.0 is listed below:
> >
> >   *  The authorization code grant is extended with the functionality
> >      from PKCE ([RFC7636]) such that the only method of using the
> >      authorization code grant according to this specification requires
> >      the addition of the PKCE mechanism
> >
> >   *  Redirect URIs must be compared using exact string matching as per
> >      Section 4.1.3 of [I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics]
> >
> >   *  The Implicit grant ("response_type=token") is omitted from this
> >      specification as per Section 2.1.2 of
> >      [I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics]
> >
> >   *  The Resource Owner Password Credentials grant is omitted from this
> >      specification as per Section 2.4 of
> >      [I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics]
> >
> >   *  Bearer token usage omits the use of bearer tokens in the query
> >      string of URIs as per Section 4.3.2 of
> >      [I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics]
> >
> >   *  Refresh tokens must either be sender-constrained or one-time use
> >      as per Section 4.12.2 of [I-D.ietf-oauth-security-topics]
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-parecki-oauth-v2-1-01#section-12
>
> I'm excited for the direction this is taking, and it has been a
> pleasure working with Dick and Torsten on this so far. My hope is that
> this first draft can serve as a good starting point for our future
> discussions!
>
> ----
> Aaron Parecki
> aaronparecki.com
> @aaronpk
>
> P.S. This notice was also posted at
> https://aaronparecki.com/2020/03/11/14/oauth-2-1
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>