Re: [Txauth] Reviewing draft-hardt-xauth-protocol-11

[Denis <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dick,

> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 9:21 AM Denis <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     Hello Francis and Dick,
>
>     The good news first: we are making some progress. We are now close
>     to an agreement with steps (1) up to (3),
>     ... except that the place where the user consent is captured is
>     not mentioned/indicated.
>

This major question which is currently left unanswered is where, when 
and how the user consent is captured.

Another important point to consider and to explain is related to the 
assurances that the user can obtain about
the respect of his choices. This point is currently left unanswered in 
draft-hardt-xauth-protocol-13.

>
>     If a RO needs to be involved and since a RO is directly associated
>     with a RS, why can't it be directly queried
>     by the appropriate RS after step (2) or later on ?
>
>
> Good question. Perhaps you can expand on a use case where that would 
> be useful?

Before I expand, would you be able to explain first under which 
circumstances a RO needs to be queried by a GS ?
How can the GS identify which RO to query ?

>     Which information is supposed to be presented to the RO ?
>     Which information is supposed to be returned by the RO ?
>
>
> Just like how the user authenticates to an AS, how the AS and RO 
> communicate is out of scope.

At the moment, the usefulness of a dialogue between a GS and a RO has 
not been explained, nor demonstrated.
The question is about the functionality of that dialogue in terms of 
input and output information (and not about
the design of a protocol or of a user interface). Anyway, AFAIU a 
dialogue between a GS and a RO is optional.

> For many use cases, the User is the RO, and the interaction is through 
> a user interface, not a machine protocol.

Wait a second. You wrote "the User is the RO". The User is attempting to 
make an access to a RS by using a Client.
_That_ User is not the RO of the RS.

Denis