[Openid-specs-ab] [openid/connect] Messages - Add 'prn' claim to id_token to support JWT Assertion (issue #687)

Brian Campbell bcampbell at pingidentity.com
Fri Dec 14 21:04:54 UTC 2012

I had a comment/question related to the below comment on issue 687 but not
really related to the issue itself. So figured the list would be the best

Regarding the potential use of an ID Token as an assertion in the
OAuth JWTAssertion Profile - aren't the requirements around the "
aud" claim also potentially a problem?

Connect says the aud of an ID Token "MUST be the OAuth 2.0 client_id of the
Client." While the OAuth JWT Assertion Profile is a little more flexible
but basically says the aud must identify the AS or its controlling entity.
Doesn't this imply that an ID Token could only really be used to get an
access token within the scope of the client to whom it was sent in the
first place? Which doesn't seem very useful. Or is it?

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Michael Jones
<issues-reply at bitbucket.org>wrote:

> --- you can reply above this line ---
> Issue 687: Messages - Add 'prn' claim to id_token to support JWT Assertion
> https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/687/messages-add-prn-claim-to-id_token-to
> Michael Jones:
> *I agree that it would be a shame, architecturally, if we can't use an ID
> Token as a assertion in a way that complies with the OAuth JWT Assertion
> Profile. * I believe we need to address this.
> There are few ways to do this, as I see it:
> 1.  Add "prn" to the ID Token.  Upside:  Simple.  Downsides:  Wastes space
> through duplication of data; potential interop problem where not everyone
> duplicates or uses the information in the same way.
> 2.  Replace "user_id" with "prn" in the ID Token.  Downside:  Less
> mnemonic than user_id.  Upside:  simple.
> 3.  Modify the OAuth JWT Assertion Profile to allow the subject to be
> identified by a claim other than "prn" - possibly explicitly calling out
> "user_id".  Upside:  would work.  Downside:  Codifies inconsistency.
> 4.  Replace both "user_id" and "prn" with a different claim in both specs.
>  Candidates include "id" and "sub".
> Let's make this a topic for Monday's call.
> --
> This is an issue notification from bitbucket.org. You are receiving
> this either because you are the owner of the issue, or you are
> following the issue.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20121214/8bd67998/attachment.html>

More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list