[Txauth] RS/AS communication for multiparty cases

Fabien Imbault <fabien.imbault@gmail.com> Fri, 03 July 2020 09:27 UTC

Return-Path: <fabien.imbault@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8086D3A0B6B for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:27:55 -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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 MZVdAM4Jhy6c for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com (mail-io1-xd33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]) (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 364763A0044 for <txauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id a12so31848741ion.13 for <txauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Jul 2020 02:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=n21CwZk9k4hVl/D6R8mZzqRoE6uFT7uXml02Bum4u9Q=; b=FpBsMP+5a/pnVzYlSdNK1PXeE+pPl1FG0W+P7ik3v1978mk+ffaNIrk5YXyiI+D6Od pZCDQH6LV/PbzclE2a5YO9E6gB3uvNFOw7YcM1AeqC774c4rwcJiIDoypR0t/FB452oI yfBt8A6knY2fDTaL3TSjNdavCdwG9S1xCSX70t2kO7VtwTrF8aN59MRvVhsGBuQRHXFb yU7YuuQnwIqBQ7bqw16LBNh/pyH7drAGnFOY20yWj4VU//JmerMTHJiI0VpOc3IflIGe 7ijZukSXeHpZNXfSQHs5Pi/7zJEupWN6qw80ZU86nIab2tCZQnqAcweudgyw3BHLJXDN vGMA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=n21CwZk9k4hVl/D6R8mZzqRoE6uFT7uXml02Bum4u9Q=; b=YyoPjLUOk7qF1fQZu2kClBbOCjN/nMOeIZoz1mDZ6XUhPakdPq0oYy2WAMjkWS24qQ L4Ravr7mVoOy1Br3s+Oxgsm/YsGy41BmSJO3SIu6vm+HLfBefFqjXVQg4G0YdpFFn1CC bMoaA5Kot3/5JEOupZVUgnTm+8WHxEvkmmbcJvi/JE2HBWm6aWL2UxnggTdeGFyjfjsX A6WVx0tY/vX/oksxUxusbvWLn2vOl7I0oCxI3FjPd36Ah0BMzjECiCU/i+5SJlihMTc6 jGxviprXCRxtDSds8ykHSeI47W1mGq+NogPB+gwEvcIAl3CCCC/XMklI9z/qVDW4goxv /+lw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5332qK3oaxDVuJpT6DbWkEYqYs/rJ5KKvQL4366tbQd7OqyRuGAs oDtJFxQZpKLCIhV9yHCcaZMt3tg8Eoa77SQYkMVnzBQ0iB4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyjyGNKLmwsVKJDEVOYmIpe1cpR4Y1UbJDpV1dGon9WoqqXXWCsrdTVfla4I66v13GzWxzQ++3wIUeN7ajdKaE=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8f98:: with SMTP id l24mr11331064iol.141.1593768473273; Fri, 03 Jul 2020 02:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Fabien Imbault <fabien.imbault@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 11:27:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAM8feuT20tPAAkCUE2rKyQ1MTc--14bNNRu1cPTs2xvbJAfMcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: txauth@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b4276205a9862389"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/txauth/M0aSG2TlyiJl1yHJKMYSKOQ-qT0>
Subject: [Txauth] RS/AS communication for multiparty cases
X-BeenThere: txauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <txauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/txauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:txauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 09:27:56 -0000

Hello Denis,

I have been following your comments. I still fail to see the global privacy
preserving architecture you're proposing. It would help to get a more
thorough proposal if you can.

But more specifically, I have a comment on :

"I would have preferred that you meant: the RS and the AS never
communicate directly, which is indeed a nice property to follow
to ensure the user's privacy."

I think that may come as an issue in some cases, especially for
multiparty patterns (like in UMA). Typically we may wish the RS to
start a grant request and use the handle to continue until a token is
generated.

I think those cases, which weren't initially covered by OAuth2, are
very important to cover as well. How would you cover such
requirements?

Fabien