Re: [OAUTH-WG] Token Transfer Protocol

George Fletcher <> Tue, 19 October 2010 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E61153A6882 for <>; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.63
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.63 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.368, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id em0dVqGmTayN for <>; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D16A3A67AB for <>; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o9JIFkYN024381; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:15:46 -0400
Received: from palantir.local (unknown []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id 1B3AAE0002AB; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:15:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:15:40 -0400
From: George Fletcher <>
Organization: AOL LLC
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020409070901000401020001"
x-aol-global-disposition: G
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:421673056:93952408
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33824cbde04e4019
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Token Transfer Protocol
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:29 -0000

  Question on the Reflection-Key parameter when it is generated from the 
source IP and port pair. Is the server receiving the request supposed to 
verify that the data in the Reflection-Key matches the data of the 
inbound connection? If so, then I think NAT'ing firewalls, proxies and 
network SSL off-loaders (e.g. netscalers) will break the security mechanism.


On 10/18/10 12:03 PM, Niklas Neumann wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I am currently working on a projected related to authentication and 
> secure token transfer between multiple devices. As such we are 
> employing a simple protocol that handles token transfers independent 
> of the actual type of token. We have adapted the protocol to be used 
> with OAuth tokens and submitted it as an Internet Draft: 
> I was wondering if there is interest in employing such a protocol in 
> cases where the HTTP redirection schemes of OAuth are not available or 
> not working well (e.g. desktop applications without access to a user 
> agent or authentication from a different device/application than the 
> one accessing the consumer).
> Compared to other proposals such as 
> draft-dehora-farrell-oauth-accesstoken-creds the STTP is more 
> heavyweight but in turn it also has more options. With regards to 
> authentication we didn't use SASL for complexity reasons in our work 
> initialy but I don't see any reason not to include it if this is 
> deemed more appropriate.
> The work that the draft is based on is still ongoing. Please 
> understand the draft as no more than a discussion proposal on how 
> OAuth could be opened to non-web-based environments and scenarios that 
> involve multiple devices without overloading the OAuth specification 
> itself. I am happy to further improve the draft if you think this 
> might be a viable option.
> Best regards
>   Niklas