Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implicit and code flows on the same path
Vladimir Dzhuvinov <vladimir@connect2id.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 07:59 UTC
Return-Path: <vladimir@connect2id.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 EF14B1A000A for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 23:59:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 IsKYdZvHmXoH for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 23:59:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p3plsmtpa08-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa08-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.193.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E87D1A0013 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 23:59:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.104] ([77.77.164.50]) by p3plsmtpa08-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with id GXz41s00315ZTut01Xz5eo; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:59:06 -0700
To: oauth@ietf.org
References: <56B3A400.2080606@gmx.net> <62D1E1DB-17A4-4ABD-81F3-8659F40D7E88@mit.edu> <CAOahYUxSMopc0hoXG8ocMk+p1b__NqapuztuHiWchpYRQqvP2w@mail.gmail.com> <9DC45CB4-07D8-4F17-8311-02AD60521379@ve7jtb.com> <CAAP42hBnZMV51vcL2GQD6kbCS7aDC0pz0KP-nMsoT0j+EgkiGg@mail.gmail.com> <56B9FA20.60509@gmail.com> <56BA0F42.5070702@connect2id.com> <56BA11ED.6080109@gmail.com>
From: Vladimir Dzhuvinov <vladimir@connect2id.com>
Organization: Connect2id Ltd.
Message-ID: <56BAEDC7.4040806@connect2id.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 09:59:03 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56BA11ED.6080109@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms000405040604090803010204"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/mh3QfvKYM9NJICsg6DUA5Yuhmy8>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implicit and code flows on the same path
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: <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: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:59:08 -0000
On 09/02/16 18:21, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: > Hi Vladimir > > Thanks for the response, > On 09/02/16 16:09, Vladimir Dzhuvinov wrote: >> Hi Sergey, >> >> Yes, HTTP 400 is one way to handle a missing response_type with a >> "universal" authz endpoint. >> > Indeed, looks like it makes sense >> Or, you could encode the error in the query string as well as the >> fragment, and redirect back to the client. >> > I'm not sure if that can be done in a 'universal' endpoint case > because it is not known if a client is running in the implicit context > or code flow context. Though I guess it a client is restricted at the > registration time to run only in the code or implicit flows then it > will provide a hint... If you set both the query and the fragment you'll take care of both flows :) > > Cheers, Sergey > >> Vladimir >> >> >> On 09/02/16 16:39, Sergey Beryozkin wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> OAuth2 spec recommends how to deal with a missing response_type, set >>> an error as a query or fragment parameter, depending on whether it is >>> the authorization code or implicit flow and redirect. >>> >>> This implies that authorization code and implicit handlers listen on >>> different paths, for example, >>> >>> code: /code >>> implicit: /implicit >>> >>> so if a response type is missing the handler will know how to set the >>> error on the redirect uri, as a query or a fragment..... >>> >>> However, I'd like to have a single handler, example (from the OIDC >>> core): >>> >>> "https://server.example.com/authorize" >>> >>> which will support both the code and implicit flows. >>> >>> Here, 'response_type' is an obvious hint on what kind of flow is in >>> process, however, if it is missing, how will a server know how to >>> report a missing response_type error if it uses a shared "/authorize" >>> path. >>> >>> I think in such cases reporting 400 is reasonable. Do you agree ? >>> >>> Thanks, Sergey >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > -- Vladimir Dzhuvinov :: vladimir@connect2id.com
- [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call for Ad… Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… Justin Richer
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… Adam Lewis
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… George Fletcher
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… William Denniss
- [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implicit an… Sergey Beryozkin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implici… Vladimir Dzhuvinov
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implici… Sergey Beryozkin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implici… Vladimir Dzhuvinov
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implici… Sergey Beryozkin
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Missing response_type with implici… John Bradley
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… Eduardo Gueiros
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps: Call fo… Thomas Broyer