,
Buhake Sindi
www.sindi.co.za
___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
fc7662#section-3> of OAuth 2.0 Bearer
Token
Usage [RFC6750 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6750>].
The link of [Section 5.2] and [Section 3] both points to the same link
(of RFC 7662) instead of the specified RFC. E.g. There is no Section
5.2 on RFC 7662 but the link points to it.
Kind
Hi,
Are you not mistaking this with RFC 7662? :-)
Kind Regards,
Buhake Sindi
On 15 Jan 2016 12:34, "Sergey Beryozkin" wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm reviewing RFC 7622 as we are going ahead with implementing it.
> I have a question:
>
> 1. Token Hint in the
is an existing one yet,
probably Spring Framework has?
Kind Regards,
Buhake Sindi
www.sindi.co.za
On 17 Jul 2014, at 10:47, Richard Snowden wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> after viewing some tutorials and running some samples code I understood the
> client side of OAuth 2.0.
&g
Fx1zeOXM="
In chapter 3.2.1, it states:
"using *timestamp 264095:7d8f3e4a*, nonce 7d8f3e4a, and extension string
a,b,c is ..." (where timestamp is a concatenation of ts + ":" + nonce).
Is this an error or what is the correct way to populate ts (timestamp) for
MAC header
Hi
invalid_grant
>
>
The provided authorization grant (e.g. authorization code,
> resource owner credentials) is invalid, expired, revoked, does
> not match the redirection URI used
>
I would think that the refresh_token is an authorization code that needs
refreshing, so this would be valid.
Oops. Sorry, I believe I should have said, case 2.
And why is case 2 impossible? The only time case 1 is valid in the
redirect_uri is invalid.
Buhake Sindi
On 21 February 2012 13:40, Buhake Sindi wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> OAuth 2, Draft 23, Paragraph 4.1.2.1 clearly states:
>
>
and MUST NOT automatically redirect the user-agent to the
> invalid redirection URI.
>
So, Case 1 is the only accepted case here.
Buhake Sindi
On 21 February 2012 13:34, matake@gmail wrote:
> So the answer is "Show the error to the user without redirecting back to
> the client",
Hi Thomas,
Concerning the above documentation, section 7.4. Your error attributes and
example doesn't match. Should I ignore the example shown in the document?
Buhake Sindi
The Elite Gentleman.
On 24 Oct 2011, at 16:31, Thomas Hardjono wrote:
> FYI Folks,
>
> Jus
Hi everyone,
As for encoding, my understanding is that the scope parameter were scope
fields provided by the service provider and that scope should match the
service provider scope. Fair enough, we could argue that non-UTF-8
characters can't be sent over HTTP response headers, so a better solution
10 matches
Mail list logo
