This is just my interpretation, but this feels more like invalid token, because you’re not presenting all of the material required for the token itself. The DPoP draft has added “invalid_dpop_proof” as an error code, which I think is even better, but the MTLS draft is missing such an element and that is arguably a mistake in the document. The MTLS draft also re-uses “Bearer” as a token header, which is also a mistake in my opinion.
But given the codes available, “invalid_token” seems to fit better because you aren’t messing up the request _to the resource_ itself, you’re messing up the token presentation. — Justin > On Nov 10, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Dmitry Telegin > <dmitryt=40backbase....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Any updates on this one? The missing certificate case looks more like > "invalid_request" to me: > > invalid_request > The request is missing a required parameter, includes an > unsupported parameter or parameter value, repeats the same > parameter, uses more than one method for including an access > token, or is otherwise malformed. The resource server SHOULD > respond with the HTTP 400 (Bad Request) status code. > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:23 AM Dmitry Telegin <dmit...@backbase.com > <mailto:dmit...@backbase.com>> wrote: > From the document: > > The protected resource MUST obtain, from its TLS implementation > layer, the client certificate used for mutual TLS and MUST verify > that the certificate matches the certificate associated with the > access token. If they do not match, the resource access attempt MUST > be rejected with an error, per [RFC6750 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6750>], using an HTTP 401 status > code and the "invalid_token" error code. > > Should the same error code be used in the case when the resource failed to > obtain a certificate from the TLS layer? This could happen, for example, if > the TLS stack has been misconfigured (e.g. verify-client="REQUESTED" instead > of "REQUIRED" for Undertow), and the user agent provided no certificate. > > Thanks, > Dmitry > > _______________________________________________ > 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
