Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case

Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com> Tue, 30 June 2015 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <sberyozkin@gmail.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 B52A31A8BC5 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 V40uHz4qNeJB for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x229.google.com (mail-wg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::229]) (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 B02071A8BC2 for <OAuth@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgjx7 with SMTP id x7so8493449wgj.2 for <OAuth@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0rUZGmldlveLBxrALbaWbcJYWHPLJwjAK6snL5OOGhg=; b=zcFAv3XtD4KSUaFlz/XGwTDu6IzplbErGt4ZihX+uNgS3/KRkdrUsVRYuNKi8xx+KM qW4WJ3Y1Oj3RUJD4u0nTMDJWAM8SOsVizngbm2VSLTCETU3+Ao58IMxJYYE3pQFnQlOl Bx3/inMp9usIdeS/JD9PGsL6SP24DoOHkxlG8hhSAu5KBBX0Ax/J4HJWAE08YgsR9sP/ XHPDMPHM0krB7TwU7p6vCdUlbEml7vnhhpU2FZnepf4RuZd0VfN/bvvkJgvKTFVKQNE5 avlg7UwNp7+JpWYd7O7Fe83VgX2jzNTUkomf0eTnbCEf4llymnVYNld5c9XuChO7IQrU lzdg==
X-Received: by 10.180.78.35 with SMTP id y3mr33038791wiw.62.1435667893438; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.36.226.2] ([80.169.137.63]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u7sm16873886wif.3.2015.06.30.05.38.12 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <55928DB3.7090300@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 13:38:11 +0100
From: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>, "Vivek Biswas -T (vibiswas - XORIANT CORPORATION at Cisco)" <vibiswas@cisco.com>, "OAuth@ietf.org" <OAuth@ietf.org>
References: <6B22D19DBF96664DBF49BC7B326402B42739A904@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com> <BY2PR03MB442205D40E8F1ECD88082F2F5AE0@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR03MB442205D40E8F1ECD88082F2F5AE0@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/pgRIIC0Mq4sAb44ZGvAv2amQXFw>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case
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: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:38:20 -0000

Hi,
Can you please explain what is the difference between On-Behalf-Of 
semantics described in the draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 and the 
implicit On-Behalf-Of semantics a client OAuth2 token possesses ?

For example, draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 mentions:

"Whereas, with on-behalf-of semantics, principal A still has its own 
identity separate from B and it is explicitly understood that while B 
may have delegated its rights to A, any actions taken are being taken by 
A and not B. In a sense, A is an agent for B."

This is a typical case with the authorization code flow where a client 
application acts on-behalf-of the user who authorized this application ?

Sorry if I'm missing something

Cheers, Sergey
On 25/06/15 22:28, Mike Jones wrote:
> That’s what
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-token-exchange-01 is about.
>
>                                                                  Cheers,
>
>                                                                  -- Mike
>
> *From:*OAuth [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Vivek Biswas
> -T (vibiswas - XORIANT CORPORATION at Cisco)
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 25, 2015 2:20 PM
> *To:* OAuth@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [OAUTH-WG] JWT Token on-behalf of Use case
>
> Hi All,
>
>    I am looking to solve a use-case similar to WS-Security On-Behalf-Of
> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/ws-trust/v1.4/errata01/os/ws-trust-1.4-errata01-os-complete.html#_Toc325658980>
> with OAuth JWT Token.
>
>    Is there a standard claim which we can define within the OAuth JWT
> which denote the On-behalf-of User.
>
> For e.g., a Customer Representative trying to create token on behalf of
> a customer and trying to execute services specific for that specific
> customer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vivek Biswas,
> CISSP
>
> *Cisco Systems, Inc <http://www.cisco.com/>*
>
> *Bldg. J, San Jose, USA,*
>
> *Phone: +1 408 527 9176*
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>