Re: [OAUTH-WG] Advertise PKCE support in OAuth 2.0 Discovery (draft-jones-oauth-discovery-00)

William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com> Mon, 25 January 2016 21:12 UTC

Return-Path: <wdenniss@google.com>
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 14FEE1A0267 for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.379
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.379 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 oAEaBBmxux6J for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x233.google.com (mail-oi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (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 417D41A0266 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x233.google.com with SMTP id k206so97233279oia.1 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=mICYPr25sdvZA87MUcBsz3PL1ntvFqlrMZhpGFHk3aM=; b=WVs2srmXJIm/kVDL6cLD+nx/9XvaHM9xMJCQjafhFYARNnJ3togzUpMvbVIBcxn5Z5 3oG0o8CyG8ZeE9rARfILJ9XYK9xNhkLGE9YtWLEFMjKwzzYdInwOzWXyL060vjvIN/+6 bvdieNJBxV3SSVF2R7MG+2Ko5MWuNXPY++vcFUAgRUfPtM9euZa2Wd6GAbqQ0KIDaR6t w5yUach2y7kfV3Xhnf06mzaa98gWZhQv55zl2oC7XTysMcHbN/CWiIO5hg89wdoLMcZ9 09qFC/bhqflphfY9oUhBbdrvgP81vXZ8maq+2YrC1MKyUA96a2zi9uHDYdI46cus0I2+ pM2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=mICYPr25sdvZA87MUcBsz3PL1ntvFqlrMZhpGFHk3aM=; b=UNAYCvW89Y/YSeQCsJ3hKONBlaLhxckIXI9nGiAn4S831YpK3o+2xIJpYI9nV9ftcf r2TcGdBs7cByeKnfcdfWe/witZ/bIBmr28iLf8sFREOP1osgqHU7z8Zzo81IZw9zu2z4 a21zN+sFD/X/25X3BqducptUS7to+GWcshEQTnVdaGyYwEkY5f6RTQW9E9RXCqveS1q+ XNPdHkNckilbUs3p0Je+lInOtq/ATLGfipbXHVinRj6N6JqiXWmLcl8n+xu4Ji/LzkkL uZNBUUA1t5HNyhmSJSs9jyNm6ucjx7rbRbpVgddPH1BX2bAKpuZ1X3AG5jQ9KrHlskv/ LJBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTxVsHzHkDFi7Uicu2KJTtII7nOU+ogh8GF0kpKFeo/Iksg1b+DQhmEujmuh2C7FxWbdgEeskZbU+Tlu8AX
X-Received: by 10.202.48.6 with SMTP id w6mr14432742oiw.97.1453756343526; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.227.39 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <10631235-AF1B-4122-AEAE-D56BBF38F87E@ve7jtb.com>
References: <568D24DD.3050501@connect2id.com> <EA392E73-1C01-42DC-B21D-09F570239D5E@ve7jtb.com> <CAAP42hAA6SOvfxjfuQdjoPfSh3HmK=a7PCQ_sPXTmDg+AQ6sug@mail.gmail.com> <568D5610.6000506@lodderstedt.net> <CAAP42hA8SyOOkJ-D299VgvQUdQv6NXqxSt9R0TK7Zk7JaU56eQ@mail.gmail.com> <F9C0DF10-C067-4EEB-85C8-E1208798EA54@gmail.com> <CABzCy2A+Z86UCJXeK1mLPfyq9p1QQS=_dekbEz6ibP8Z8Pz87Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAAP42hCKRpEnS7zVL7C_jpaFXwXUjzkNUzxtDa9MUKAQw7gsAA@mail.gmail.com> <10631235-AF1B-4122-AEAE-D56BBF38F87E@ve7jtb.com>
From: William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:12:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAP42hB=1rudPCzrCgaUp3W8+K0jcfoAwq3gJG5=vNeK9pqjaA@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cd986727228052a2f06cb
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/xBge9rafF0y2NKqF_klgDESVVEY>
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Advertise PKCE support in OAuth 2.0 Discovery (draft-jones-oauth-discovery-00)
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: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:12:26 -0000

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 6:17 AM, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>; wrote:

> The code_challenge and code_challenge_method parameter names predate
> calling the spec PKCE.
>
> Given that some of us deployed early versions of PKCE in products and
> opensource to mitigate the problem before the spec was completed we decided
> not to rename the parameter names from code_verifier_method to
> pkce_verifier_method.
>
> For consistency we should stick with code_verifier_methods_supported in
> discovery.
>

To clarify, did you mean "code_challenge_methods_supported"?  That is,
building on the param name "code_challenge_method" from Section 4.3
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7636#section-4.3>?


>
> John B.
>
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 3:12 AM, William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>; wrote:
>
> "code_challenge_methods_supported" definitely works for me.
>
> Any objections to moving forward with that? I would like to update our
> discovery doc shortly.
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Nat Sakimura <sakimura@gmail.com>; wrote:
>
>> Ah, OK. That's actually reasonable.
>>
>> 2016年1月21日(木) 9:31 nov matake <matake@gmail.com>;:
>>
>>> I prefer “code_challenge_methods_supported”, since the registered
>>> parameter name is “code_challenge_method”, not “pkce_method".
>>>
>>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 11:58, William Denniss <wdenniss@google.com>; wrote:
>>>
>>> Seems like we agree this should be added. How should it look?
>>>
>>> Two ideas:
>>>
>>> "code_challenge_methods_supported": ["plain", "S256"]
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> "pkce_methods_supported": ["plain", "S256"]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <
>>> torsten@lodderstedt.net>; wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 06.01.2016 um 18:25 schrieb William Denniss:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:40 AM, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>; wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Good point.  Now that PKCE is a RFC we should add it to discovery.
>>>>>
>>>>> John B.
>>>>> > On Jan 6, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <
>>>>> vladimir@connect2id.com>; wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I just noticed PKCE support is missing from the discovery metadata.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Is it a good idea to add it?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Vladimir
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Vladimir Dzhuvinov
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > OAuth mailing list
>>>>> > OAuth@ietf.org
>>>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing listOAuth@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OAuth mailing list
>>> OAuth@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>
>
>