So, wrt FB, signed request is good. It can be another example to add. On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 19:55 Phil Hunt <phil.h...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Sigh. > > Phil > > @independentid > www.independentid.com > phil.h...@oracle.com > > > > On Nov 2, 2014, at 10:33 AM, John Bradley <ve7...@ve7jtb.com> wrote: > > > If a client developer doesn't have Connect available then they need to > point the API developer at this doc, so that they do provide Connect or > some other API that takes into account all of the security considerations. > > > > A client developer should never make up there own identity protocol out > of someone else's API that is not designed for it. > > > > A vanilla OAuth API with no additional security considerations on the > API developers part is pretty much guaranteed to go horribly wrong. > > > > John B. > > > > On Nov 2, 2014, at 2:15 PM, Phil Hunt <phil.h...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > >> We may have a problem with audience here. > >> > >> Justin mentioned he wrote it for service providers but the threats are > against the client that wants to authenticate users. > >> > >> Would be better to have recommendations for each group. > >> > >> Since oidc is the only recommendation, what does a client implementer > do when openid connect is not available? Suggest we give a list of > qualities developers should look for (eg is fb connect good)? > >> > >> Phil > >> > >>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 09:04, Torsten Lodderstedt <tors...@lodderstedt.net> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I just read the document. It explains the situation, > challenges/threats, and options very clear and readable. > >>> > >>> So +1 for publishing it soon. > >>> > >>> kind regards, > >>> Torsten. > >>> > >>> Am 28.10.2014 00:21, schrieb Richer, Justin P.: > >>>> I've been incorporating peoples' feedback into the proposed oauth.net > page, and the current state is here: > >>>> > >>>> https://github.com/jricher/oauth.net/blob/authentication/ > articles/authentication.php > >>>> > >>>> Commentary has slowed down and I think the document's in reasonable. > I would like to publish this as a draft version on oauth.net in the very > near future (like, this week), so get comments and feedback to me on this > soon. I'm going to be at IIW all week if anyone wants to back me into a > corner and talk about this. > >>>> > >>>> -- Justin > >>>> > >>>>> On Oct 16, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Hannes Tschofenig < > hannes.tschofe...@gmx.net> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Participants: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Brian Campbell > >>>>> * John Bradley > >>>>> * Derek Atkins > >>>>> * Phil Hunt > >>>>> * William Kim > >>>>> * Josh Mandel > >>>>> * Hannes Tschofenig > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Notes: > >>>>> > >>>>> Justin distributed a draft writeup and explained the reasoning behind > >>>>> it. The intended purpose is to put the write-up (after enough > review) on > >>>>> oauth.net. See attachments. Justin solicited feedback from the > >>>>> conference call participants and from the working group. > >>>>> > >>>>> One discussion item was specifically related to the concept of > audience > >>>>> restrictions, which comes in two flavours: (a) restriction of the > access > >>>>> token regarding the resource server and (b) restriction of the id > token > >>>>> regarding the client. Obviously, it is necessary to have both of > these > >>>>> audience restrictions in place and to actually check them. > >>>>> > >>>>> The group then went into a discussion about the use of pseudonyms in > >>>>> authentication and the problems deployments ran into when they used > >>>>> pseudonyms together with a wide range of attributes that identified > >>>>> users nevertheless. Phil suggested to produce a write-up about this > topic. > >>>>> > >>>>> Finally, the group started a discussion about potential actions for > the > >>>>> OAuth working groups. Two activities were mentioned, namely to > produce > >>>>> an IETF draft of the write-up Justin has prepared as a "formal" > response > >>>>> to the problems with authentication using OAuth and, as a second > topic, > >>>>> potential re-chartering of the OAuth working group to work on some > >>>>> solutions in this area. Hannes suggested to postpone these > discussions > >>>>> and to first finish the write-up Justin had distributed. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ciao > >>>>> Hannes & Derek > >>>>> <Authentication with OAuth 2.doc><Authentication with OAuth > 2.html><Authentication with OAuth 2.pdf>________________________ > _______________________ > >>>>> 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 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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
