Re: [OAUTH-WG] Indicating sites where a token is valid

Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu@google.com> Fri, 07 May 2010 18:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mscurtescu@google.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F143A6834 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.252, BAYES_50=0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8mI5WCGEteby for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E19B3A65A5 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com [172.25.105.83]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o47I2B6O023439 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:02:11 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1273255332; bh=CiahR699ip/ou4WT8OxYVT/C+CQ=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=pRaxNJJctOsIw1mpzRJS7IlWpHOzkR7lq/jzKnSbQyz/Fto93GmEaCbbois18AtJ9 5WurSfXcksfifvmMgfb6Q==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id: subject:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=yOR3/FVZ3BIKI69mIKf8LTUVEMI1zdgxKqW17gub2qGbNeG9rxgNzeQ1SH1EA4V5V oGpBfHo4UNb/lBmwe+ahQ==
Received: from pwi1 (pwi1.prod.google.com [10.241.219.1]) by kpbe19.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o47I2Aiw012997 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:02:10 -0700
Received: by pwi1 with SMTP id 1so655022pwi.11 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 May 2010 11:02:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.247.17 with SMTP id u17mr140191rvh.151.1273255330266; Fri, 07 May 2010 11:02:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.141.125.21 with HTTP; Fri, 7 May 2010 11:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BC9EED4C-B667-4AC2-A663-CEAC0B7CB620@lodderstedt.net>
References: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E11263073D6D@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <q2hfd6741651005062105y46152452x370fac0dd12d55c6@mail.gmail.com> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E112631B24FC@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com> <4BE3A5DC.5030601@lodderstedt.net> <BC9EED4C-B667-4AC2-A663-CEAC0B7CB620@lodderstedt.net>
From: Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu@google.com>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 11:01:50 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTincZ8_0-t2r_Ey9BestA_knMciYsxRLyHcOvSVO@mail.gmail.com>
To: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Indicating sites where a token is valid
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 07 May 2010 18:02:28 -0000

Returning a scope parameter with issued tokens is not a bad idea.

But this, and also the sites parameter suggested by James, can both
potentially be solved with a transparent token format. Such a token
can make explicit the:
- expiry time
- scopes
- sites
- etc.

The Simple Web Token spec goes along these lines. SWT has a parameter
called Audience, which I assumed would point to the client, but it
could also represent "sites".

Marius



On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Torsten Lodderstedt
<torsten@lodderstedt.net> wrote:
> Additionally, I would propose to indicate the scope associated with a token
> to the client using a scope response parameter. This is especially useful
> (1) if the client did not pass a scope parameter but the server decided to
> associate a scope based on its policy or (2) if the user decided to
> authorize a subset of the requested scope only.
> Regards,
> Torsten.
>
>
>
> Am 07.05.2010 um 07:32 schrieb Torsten Lodderstedt
> <torsten@lodderstedt.net>:
>
> what about an additional realm response value?
>
> If there is a binding between realm and token, the client can decide based
> on the realm attribute discovered using a WWW-Authenticate response which
> token to use.
>
> regards,
> Torsten.
>
> Am 07.05.2010 07:06, schrieb Manger, James H:
>
> Every existing use of Cookies, HTTP Basic, and HTTP Digest relies on clients
> being told by the server about the sites at which the secret
> (cookie/password/token) can be used (and, more importantly, where is must
> not be used). This occurs without requiring service-specific knowledge in
> the client app. OAuth aims to replace some of these uses.
>
>
>
> HTTP Basic authentication works safely from clients with no service-specific
> knowledge because the client knows not to send the password it gets from the
> user to other sites.
>
>
>
> HTTP Digest authentication allows a password to used to across a set of
> domains specified in a WWW-Authenticate response header, but the password
> will not be used at arbitrary other sites.
>
>
>
> Cookies are sent in requests to the same site, sites with the same parent,
> or only https sites, depending on details from the service when setting the
> cookie.
>
>
>
>
>
> To date, OAuth has assumed every client app has lots of service-specific
> knowledge to make these choices. OAuth needs to remove the need for so much
> service-specific knowledge to be as interoperable as other standard auth
> mechanism, otherwise it is a poor replacement.
>
>
>
> --
>
> James Manger
>
>
>
> From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, 7 May 2010 2:05 PM
> To: Manger, James H
> Cc: OAuth WG
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Indicating sites where a token is valid
>
>
>
> Hey James,
>
> Do you have a specific example in mind where this either has been an issue
> or will be an issue? Most client implementations I've seen of OAuth (and
> technologies like OAuth) have a strong binding between the access token(s),
> site they were issued by, and user they belong to. So I haven't heard of
> this being a problem in the wild...
>
>
>
> --David
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>