IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Scopes

Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net> Tue, 19 June 2018 13:01 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 8425F130EA5 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 zOPBRbTdWBVl for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtprelay06.ispgateway.de (smtprelay06.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18DF9130EF8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 05:53:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [80.155.34.3] (helo=[10.3.12.195]) by smtprelay06.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <torsten@lodderstedt.net>) id 1fVG8c-0000QU-AX; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:53:34 +0200
From: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten@lodderstedt.net>
Message-Id: <2F1E9439-DD6D-478E-964A-A7272D5BFBF5@lodderstedt.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D47C4473-CB07-4816-B998-75CC48F2A798"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\))
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:53:31 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAKL4o=EO0_NU+VGmhO=ojxS5w8MCNP2h7hGmQ5E1z7f59Jz76w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: David Waite <david@alkaline-solutions.com>, oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
To: Jacob Ideskog <jacob.ideskog@curity.io>
References: <291DC85D-66B4-403F-8159-52D0091F7631@lodderstedt.net> <E540DC60-1FDD-4BF8-A1DF-8FF8348760A1@alkaline-solutions.com> <CAKL4o=EO0_NU+VGmhO=ojxS5w8MCNP2h7hGmQ5E1z7f59Jz76w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2)
X-Df-Sender: dG9yc3RlbkBsb2RkZXJzdGVkdC5uZXQ=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/vqsPgdzwi2kMQiNFXNIcRzlno5g>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Dynamic Scopes
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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 Jun 2018 13:01:39 -0000

Hi Jacob,

thanks for your thoughts on dynamic scopes. 

> Am 19.06.2018 um 08:16 schrieb Jacob Ideskog <jacob.ideskog@curity.io>:
> 
> For OpenID I still think the signed claims parameters make a more flexible approach, but OpenID isn't always in play.

Why do you think it is more flexible? 

kind regards,
Torsten.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email