Again, it's a good security optimization, and it makes sense for large
internet providers. But I don't think this argument holds for small
intranet providers, where there won't be proxies in the middle and many
of the clients will largely be non-browser-based and cacheless anyway.
At least, that's how it will be in most of my deployments. I think it
would be better to call out the cache/proxy/leakage issues directly,
recommend POST for most instances to address these concerns, but say
that a server MAY accept GET requests with query parameters on the token
endpoint. 

 -- Justin

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 09:56 -0400, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
> Proxies and caches. 
> 
> EHL
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 12, 2010, at 8:48, "Justin Richer" <jric...@mitre.org> wrote:
> 
> > I'd like to keep form-encoded inputs. I think it makes sense to use a
> > well-established key-value mechanism, and the asymmetry at play here is
> > what the web is made of (post a form, get HTML/XML/JSON/whatever).
> > 
> > Along those lines, I'd actually like to relax the restriction of using
> > "POST" and allow for query arguments on the token endpoint as well. Long
> > ago it was argued that the POST requirement was to keep query parameters
> > from leaking into server logs. That's a fine implementation-specific
> > security optimization, but I don't think it belongs mandated in the
> > spec. As a practical matter, I know that for most of my implementations
> > (on small single servers), anyone who's got access to the web server
> > logs have access to the tokens in the database. 
> > 
> > Were there other reasons for mandating POST here that I'm forgetting?
> > 
> > -- Justin
> > 
> > On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 00:31 -0400, Brian Eaton wrote:
> >> Hey folks -
> >> 
> >> Today, the token endpoint takes form-encoded inputs, and sends JSON
> >> outputs.  This requires developers to use both form encoding and a
> >> json parser.
> >> 
> >> Many services expose symmetric APIs for non-browser endpoints.  For
> >> example, an API call normally takes JSON input and returns JSON
> >> output.
> >> 
> >> What do people think about having the token endpoint accept and return 
> >> JSON?
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Brian
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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

Reply via email to