Re: [OAUTH-WG] Manual Authorization Codes -- Help/Feedback requested

[Gregory Prisament <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the link, that's very similar to what I'm going for.

Any idea why people lost interest in the Device Flow?  It seems like a
useful option to have!

Also, in doing some research, I came across Google's
"application-specific passwords", which seem to be another way to
solve this problem.
http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1173270

Any thoughts on application-specific passwords.  Do you think an
authorization server could implement application-specific passwords,
passing it off as the "client credentials" grant type.  Would that be
in spec?

Cheers,
Greg

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Justin Richer <[e-mail]> wrote:
> What you're describing is the Device Flow, which was pulled out of the main
> document a while ago and now sits here, somewhat outdated and unloved:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-recordon-oauth-v2-device-00
>
> In this, the app gives the user a short code that they enter into a URL, do
> the authorization there, and get a short code back. It's effectively the
> same as the auth code flow, but it does the dance without HTTP redirects.
>
>  -- Justin
>
>
> On 01/10/2012 02:23 PM, Gregory Prisament wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> I am developing a REST API and trying to follow the OAuth 2.0 protocol
>> for authentication, and have a few questions for you good folks.
>>
>> The use case I'm interested in is native applications (such as linux
>> command-line programs) that are unable or unwilling to involve a
>> user-agent.  In this case, it seems redirection-based flows
>> ("Authorization Code" and "Implicit Grant Types") are out!  That
>> leaves "Client Credentials" and "Resource Owner Credentials".
>>
>> "Client Credentials" do not seem appropriate because the client may be
>> installed on multiple machines and used by different resource owners.
>>
>> "Resource Owner Credentials" COULD work, but I'd rather not require
>> the resource owner to reveal their username and password.
>>
>> One solution, which seems reasonable to me, would be to extend OAuth2
>> to include another grant type called "Manual Authorization Code".
>> Using a web browser, the resource owner would login&  authenticate
>>
>> with the authorization server (using session log-on, etc).  From there
>> they could enter an Application ID and press a button "Generate Manual
>> Authorization Code".  The resource owner would then type this Manual
>> Authorization Code into the client, and the client could exchange it
>> for an Access Token.
>>
>> But before I go down this route -- writing an extension, etc.. -- I
>> wanted the WG's feedback.  It seems there are a few different ways to
>> handle this use case and was curious which you think best matches the
>> intentions of the OAuth2 spec.
>>
>> POSSIBLE APPROACHES:
>> (1) "Manual Authorization Code" extension.
>> See description above.
>>
>> (2) "Client Credentials" with each resource owner registering a separate
>> client.
>> We could achieve a similar effect to (1) by using "Client
>> Credentials".  Say the client is a command-line program
>> "example-client-cli", which a large number of resource owners have
>> downloaded and installed.  Each resource owner would register the
>> client with the authorization server and configure their local install
>> by telling it the client_id and client_secret.
>>
>> (3) Something else entirely?
>>
>> QUESTIONS FOR YOUR:
>> (Q1) Has the WG thought about this particular use case ("CLI clients")
>> and do you have a recommended authorization approach.
>> (Q2) Do Manual Authorization Codes make sense?  Would anyone else find
>> it useful to have - if I were to write up an extension document for
>> it?
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advanced for you help!
>> Cheers,
>> Greg Prisament
>> Software Architect
>> PowerCloud Systems
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>
>



-- 
Greg Prisament
Software Architect
PowerCloud Systems
[e-mail]
mobile: [phone]