IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] DPoP - Downgrades, Transitional Rollout & Mixed Token Type Deployments

Francis Pouatcha <fpo@adorsys.de> Thu, 11 June 2020 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <fpo@adorsys.de>
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 BB67F3A0B1C for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=adorsys.de
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 VZN5FwX4bg3s for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (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 EA4DD3A0B0B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id x13so7010640wrv.4 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=adorsys.de; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YVHmmNW3JVhkqIPloW0C9DCKvClsu9suGLWNqSvhBsM=; b=JawBA6mrPWRJ5ShJ9vSCkilZepN3xgQhB30cQZ0oJ2tkQ+LTuJ51PSfgk8AxD3u3x+ lRmOrMx2LZTy7WHoyMUFy2Exw+M0LCGUnlN5tmko7H1DlrMYFP36ksoFk03WCFZkqUqr ZX2gR+bSzFKGF36o4XRee0ojuaM6SSjt/BV6c=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YVHmmNW3JVhkqIPloW0C9DCKvClsu9suGLWNqSvhBsM=; b=mWc5HIqU1sIjsswrrAGsWRmWXiNgRhnScvBxq18dGmdHEnboF9aQy44dLK+BATfywv ScHe2XdjYQzbutcMpza0KHMhKFJN5zyWSx75aodZ8ZQNgrKAEtdFKPXrT0pc6fiLMQcB c8vHGXeP0WGHT26T+CdxtvtqLcJuTlRVlg5Ir+8aJdAjwPSrODRSPrY64GMuip9nW3XG Xa2S2OkpzP/jv91nAjpk8qW6HPv/6jqCfaCb42atgKJENtBvyq+tokMOUv10HYF4sS1+ tCdIXBo5SLSH/k1p4jce+Bv6Zpk6FKXoXZewgQ6ClHGFykYcb/qtL58uUnnnZktlRjxI joVw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YnOeT38umwrg/8wTeS0x0e0q+QD5mShZBdyrN8JNbGK808uV3 k4dOCYwHGI7GbdDtjLofjljb5s67saAZnrtmEgE0ag==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxITnY/a3q56sLGrpIMcnqKyIQbXq3ogLBoZ15pn1Cvtd8Vncgc8d/jUjDG40yaqvgULv3lwrEE1kQ8BaXyMT0=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:e545:: with SMTP id z5mr10199064wrm.89.1591896285306; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8762DAF0-CA56-407D-9DD9-86809BD844B2@lodderstedt.net> <6473D5F3-7C90-400D-9263-FA5B6082496B@forgerock.com>
In-Reply-To: <6473D5F3-7C90-400D-9263-FA5B6082496B@forgerock.com>
From: Francis Pouatcha <fpo@adorsys.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:24:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOW4vyNS1g51vrUPHYyAmma9XjjcwXUyUJPLJ6Artm8MFuxxWw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Neil Madden <neil.madden@forgerock.com>
Cc: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten=40lodderstedt.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, oauth <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009af76b05a7d23ccf"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/wRN-4gpkq5JAaCkDW8HrQ3TyuLs>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] DPoP - Downgrades, Transitional Rollout & Mixed Token Type Deployments
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: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:24:49 -0000

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 3:26 AM Neil Madden <neil.madden@forgerock.com>
wrote:

> +1
>
> > On 11 Jun 2020, at 07:36, Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten=
> 40lodderstedt.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > I generally agree with the proposal, but I would suggest to limit it to
> public clients.
>


> >
> > In case of confidential clients, the refresh token is (via the
> client_id) already bound to the client’s secret(s) and those can be
> rotated. Additionally binding the refresh token to a DPoP key would limit
> it’s applicability w/o a benefit.
>
I meant *PoP* and not *DPoP*. The client secret is also a variant of PoP.
This does not change the value of this sentence: "*refresh_token shall
always be bound to a PoP*".

-- 
Francis Pouatcha
Co-Founder and Technical Lead at adorys
https://adorsys-platform.de/solutions/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email