Re: [OAUTH-WG] AD Review of draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-09

Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net> Wed, 26 August 2020 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
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 E41E83A124E for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, 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=lodderstedt.net
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 YcW6hWLF9a6h for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x536.google.com (mail-ed1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::536]) (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 3E7E73A124B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x536.google.com with SMTP id c8so1547562edn.8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lodderstedt.net; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=2tlZrXmf2yyXsRglOEC9N0qFCH7Q6XKUV9KdQNFyFgU=; b=dp3mO9fU6N1fl0WvEklpbamsBu90TxBKABjy9HefRLJWB1Mxtuv7iSO1+DfaqZtKQw J81m5wddOeDbthuc46De9nTveV+0heCTnc0eEees2GbBZqDeMhSEqWPZSxpCopG7Bo3R FfvmBAXlKGtKacuDnAbKolZ823B3SzZJzM74GNqF/R6iAcnLMZnZb0FSxIHaCj0j5NoJ 9ZHXPkiZYJlPWkHRpq6JjQru7RwIPXIJ6AI96913JXryZ64oZtat2c4lKfbq/dLJQhnD h+lV+tAIwrQwAkpUTisFrcYcHFaoVWHH4QzFX70yCx39w4P+bB2ezkcZUPuz1Y7ytmnQ AZ0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=2tlZrXmf2yyXsRglOEC9N0qFCH7Q6XKUV9KdQNFyFgU=; b=TB3J8wLYBUFL3MLmMDZqZDrRO/aGO1bxykI/vJ6jrJ+KmvLWOCqjR4tCKCoM5q7FxM WDda2ks+0GN9SsQBWA+4U63kH7oZrejeZGvBy8rF93GNXwD85Vo4FJWLw+KMPTb4AUQq lGK6FWVlpSMOGcs8es7puToXJ3juflM1tezr24qBuAG+bxwCwp9DFa1SJpDiRwWVNP16 GYu8gdp5YT7J4jrSG1J0VslwkTq1VxeP80+7SEap8FXL4eRkzFahyS+dUe7gYW9mQ8ju kId/4FlHN9dU9QsojRqqJlBTItxW9hM1xKvrKdMSSniIItEHV5DiGWbf5FPGBSmGrrpc QH2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Y/uZw6khECZF9ZqOSkgGcs2FvyI54r3XX0eHzRt3rlGgs5/rO y9u2j74i4zMzZd4W7MgfYf9oBA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVb11BqO28qb4v89aDo2vaFqZpJ4C3OaVwwL3SYNlBrB07+y3KPFCv0DyzQZ55m7V9OvvEOw==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cc14:: with SMTP id q20mr1505809edt.309.1598444787463; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p200300eb8f1e2a050c334d31fc069d53.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (p200300eb8f1e2a050c334d31fc069d53.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:eb:8f1e:2a05:c33:4d31:fc06:9d53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p9sm1778230ejg.120.2020.08.26.05.26.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
In-Reply-To: <8a42a78a8a3645f793b0991e4dd5bb34@cert.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:26:25 +0200
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <428325A0-611A-4E3B-943A-4D848F7BB038@lodderstedt.net>
References: <8a42a78a8a3645f793b0991e4dd5bb34@cert.org>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/qEFHZdIEW5OUcJiJnJjFCrV-BXk>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] AD Review of draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-09
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: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 12:26:31 -0000

Hi Roman, 

thanks for your review feedback. 

> On 21. Aug 2020, at 16:43, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I conducted an another AD review of draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-09.  As background, -07 of this document went to IESG Review and the document was brought back to the WG to address the DISCUSS points.  
> 
> Below is my feedback which can be addressed concurrently with IETF LC.
> 
> ** Section 5.  I want to clarify what are the permissible members of token_introspection.  The two relevant text snippets seem to be:
> 
> (a) "token_introspection  A JSON object containing the members of the
>           token introspection response, as specified in the "OAuth
>           Token Introspection Response" registry established by
>           [RFC7662] as well as other members."
> 
> (b) "Claims from the "JSON Web Token Claims" registry that are
>           commonly used in [OpenID.Core] and can be applied to the
>           resource owner MAY be included as members in the
>           "token_introspection" claim."
> 
> -- Per (a), Recommend citing the IANA sub-registry directly -- https://www.iana.org/assignments/oauth-parameters/oauth-parameters.xhtml#token-introspection-response (and not the "as specified in the "OAuth Token Introspection Response" registry established by [RFC7662]")

done 

> 
> -- Per (a), "... as well as other members", what members is this referencing?  Is that (b)?  Recommend being clear upfront on which exact registries are the sources of valid members.

I reworked the whole paragraph (hrefs for registries not shown). 

As specified in section 2.2. of [RFC7662], specific implementations MAY extend the token introspection response with service-specific claims. In the context of this specification, such claims will be added as top-level members of the token_introspection claim. Response names intended to be used across domains MUST be registered in the OAuth Token Introspection Response registry defined by [RFC7662]. In addition, claims from the JSON Web Token Claims registry established by [RFC7519] MAY be included as members in the token_introspection claim. They can serve to convey the privileges delegated to the client, to identify the resource owner or to provide a required contact detail, such as an e-Mail address or phone number. When transmitting such claims the AS acts as an identity provider in regard to the RS. The AS determines based on its RS-specific policy what claims about the resource owner to return in the token introspection response.

Does this work for you?

> 
> -- Per (b), "... commonly used in [OpenId.Core]", what are those specifically?  Is that claims registered in https://www.iana.org/assignments/jwt/jwt.xhtml#claims whose reference is [OpenID Connect Core 1.0]?  Recommend being unambiguous in which claims are permitted by pointing the IANA registry.
> 
> -- If I'm understanding right that the source comes either from oauth-parameters.xhtml#token-introspection-response or jwt.xhtml#claims, what happens if it isn't one of those?

Every implementation is also free to use their own specific claims. This is defined in section 2.2. of RFC 

> 
> ** Section 5.  Per " The AS MUST ensure the release of any privacy-sensitive data is legally based", recommend also including a forward reference to Section 9

done

best regards,
Torsten. 

> 
> Regards,
> Roman
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth