Hi Eran,

including dynamic values within redirect uris is standard practice today and is 
allowed by the spec's text so far. I don't mind to change it but the restricted 
behavior you prefer is a significant protocol change.

Moreover, I would like to understand the threat you have in mind and include it 
into our threat model. So would you please provide a more detailed description?

regards,
Torsten.




Eran Hammer-Lahav <e...@hueniverse.com> schrieb:

Allowing any flexibly in the redirection URI is a bad thing and the latest 
draft (pre -17) clearly states that. The main fear is that by allowing the 
query to be changed dynamically, attackers can find open redirector loopholes 
to abuse. I really wanted to make registration of the absolute URI a MUST, but 
didn't go that far.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Torsten Lodderstedt
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 2:22 PM
> To: OAuth WG
> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] state parameter and XSRF detection
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> while working on a new revision of the OAuth security document, a question
> arose I would like to clarify on the list.
> 
> The "state" parameter is supposed to be used to link a certain authorization
> request and response. Therefore, the client stores a value in this parameter
> that is somehow bound to a value retained on the device (the user agent)
> originating the authorization request.
> 
> The question now is: Would it be compliant with the core spec to use any
> other URI query parameter encoded in the redirect_uri, instead of the
> "state" parameter, to achieve the same goal? Probably the client already has
> a working "legacy" implementation it does not want to change just for
> OAuth2 compliance.
> 
> According to section 2.2.1, the redirection uri could contain a dynamic
> portion:
> 
> "The authorization server SHOULD require the client to pre-register
> their redirection URI or at least certain components such as the
> scheme, host, port and path"
> 
> So this should be fine.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> regards,
> Torsten.
> 
>_____________________________________________

> 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