Return-Path: <jricher@mit.edu>
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 C1DE91B31F8
 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:29:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.303
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.303 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3,
 RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 ZMUgKY05OKG4 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:29:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu
 [18.9.25.13])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAB9B1B31F6
 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 08:29:11 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 1209190d-f79306d000006b70-6f-569e6456935d
Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35])
 (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id
 A6.F9.27504.6546E965; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:29:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11])
 by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id u0JGT9Do031979;
 Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:29:10 -0500
Received: from [192.168.128.48] (static-96-237-195-53.bstnma.fios.verizon.net
 [96.237.195.53]) (authenticated bits=0)
 (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
 by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id u0JGT76Z022618
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);
 Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:29:09 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CAOahYUzV2hn0cdbpZf6zqm70aWEt6fOiUm6ttfS7Ai6FrF+ofw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:29:05 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8D27A368-436A-4DBA-96B6-8CC76253F7AF@mit.edu>
References: <CAOahYUzV2hn0cdbpZf6zqm70aWEt6fOiUm6ttfS7Ai6FrF+ofw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lewis Adam-CAL022 <Adam.Lewis@motorolasolutions.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrBuWMi/M4GKvlMXObT9ZLU6+fcXm
 wOSxZMlPJo8JE3+wBDBFcdmkpOZklqUW6dslcGW8+3CNrWA7T8WtGU1sDYyNXF2MnBwSAiYS
 z9d/YIewxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEksJhJ4vCZWcwQzkZGiWXLDrNDOLeZJN7tPgjWwiygLvFn3iVm
 EJtXQE/i1a3LrCC2sICzxLcf+5hAbDYBVYnpa1qAbA4OToFAiZ5lUiBhFqDwtvsf2UHCIGPa
 T7pATNSWWLbwNTNImFfASmL72RKQsJBAgMSvrkaw4SICFhJbX15hgrhZVmL370dMExgFZyG5
 ZxaSe2YhmbqAkXkVo2xKbpVubmJmTnFqsm5xcmJeXmqRrpFebmaJXmpK6SZGcPBK8u5gfHdQ
 6RCjAAejEg/vC8e5YUKsiWXFlbmHGCU5mJREeY0i5oUJ8SXlp1RmJBZnxBeV5qQWH2KU4GBW
 EuG9FweU401JrKxKLcqHSUlzsCiJ8+7qAJokkJ5YkpqdmlqQWgSTleHgUJLgvZ0E1ChYlJqe
 WpGWmVOCkGbi4AQZzgM0vASkhre4IDG3ODMdIn+KUVFKnPcSSEIAJJFRmgfXC0ouCW8Pm75i
 FAd6RZhXIBmoigeYmOC6XwENZgIa/NNjNsjgkkSElFQD47wduUqSESlPi04byQY3L2I7ZcJh
 d91Vvv2QflAEY/eN28wXCk4yyIhNdHi1oslf5MqT81/eabV8033mPvvUz1c5iv9OHFd8Pllt
 1Rv+C1fT2J1nuIdne/Jm/X+z4JDqGWvrPS+nHPFg2/zx3PvDklbXnoZlLf/JPemCisC87rJ9
 21ZzefrtqVJiKc5INNRiLipOBAAzpUiGCQMAAA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/qanACbwZQKbkD7fgb-7lD3UIGUs>
Cc: "<oauth@ietf.org>" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] best practice for Native app + state param?
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, 19 Jan 2016 16:29:14 -0000

I think there=E2=80=99s no advice because it=E2=80=99s not different: =
you should still be using the state parameter. Just use a random value =
with high enough entropy, which is also what most web applications do =
(the advice in the spec is weird and I think a remnant of Bradley making =
things too complicated in his advice). In a web app, it gets tied to the =
session cookie back on the server, you don=E2=80=99t need any =
particularly fancy binding beyond your usual session management. In a =
native app, just store it in the application before you send it and look =
it up on the way back to make sure it matches. Combine this with PKCE =
and you=E2=80=99ve got a pretty solid set of protections for native =
apps.

 =E2=80=94 Justin

> On Jan 19, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Adam Lewis =
<Adam.Lewis@motorolasolutions.com> wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> I have not been able to find any usage for the state parameter in =
authorization requests for native apps.  Further, the spec guidance of =
using a hash of the session cookie as the value of the state param =
doesn't apply for native apps.
>=20
> draft-wdenniss-oauth-native-apps is silent on the matter.
>=20
> Usage of state seems to be unique to clients conforming to the web app =
profile.
>=20
> Bottom line, looking to vet that it's safe to omit the state parameter =
in the authorization request for native apps, and that I'm not missing =
something critical.
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

