[Openid-specs-ab] Idea: client issue token themselves

Preibisch, Sascha H Sascha.Preibisch at ca.com
Mon Nov 5 21:19:26 UTC 2018

Hi Tom!

Thanks for your thoughts.

The AS still authenticates the client and verifies the requested scopes as it does today. It also authenticates the resource_owner who authorizes the client access to resources (which is not really obvious in the diagram, I will update that).

Details about the resource_owner may be included but maybe not. If they, the best way may be as an id_token. That id_token would include values such as ‘acr’.

The client is trustworthy if the RS accepts the grant of the AS. And the grant can only be meant for that particular client since only that client can sign the JWT with a ‘cnf.x5t#S256’ matching value.

I will collect more feedback and update my page accordingly.


From: Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones at gmail.com>
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018 at 10:45 AM
To: Artifact Binding/Connect Working Group <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
Cc: "Preibisch, Sascha H" <Sascha.Preibisch at ca.com>
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Idea: client issue token themselves

There seems to be a fundamental problem with even calling this an "authorization server". Authorization happens only at the resource server itself. The best the "AS" can do is issue a set of claims (some masquerading as scopes) - some of which it might also verify. The challenge with the jwt is that the validity of the entire jwt is what is asserted. What is needed by the resource server is the validity statement for each claim.  Including the claim that the client is trustworthy and (in openid) that the level of authentication and/or proof-of-presence and/or consent of the user was validated (or not).  Combining these various ideas might seem like a good idea, but if the resource server has different criteria for different claims, it might not be sufficient.
Peace ..tom

On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:53 AM Preibisch, Sascha H via Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>> wrote:
Hi all!

I would like to share the idea of oauth clients that issue token themselves with you.

I wrote a blog post about it here:

Thanks for any feedback,

P.S.: today is the last day of CA, as of Monday its Broadcom. I am not sure if my blog post is available afterwards at that location!

Sascha Preibisch
Principal Software Architect
CA Technologies

CA Mobile API Gateway
CA API Management OAuth Toolkit

Email: sascha.preibisch at ca.com<mailto:sascha.preibisch at ca.com>
Blog: https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth

My book: API Development - A Practical Guide for Business Implementation Success<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.apress.com_de_book_9781484241394&d=DwMFaQ&c=_hRq4mqlUmqpqlyQ5hkoDXIVh6I6pxfkkNxQuL0p-Z0&r=BjnOFeRZMwPBZLm00SguJm4i4lt0O13oAeF-9EZheL8&m=whHzJG0H4_GWBEIB6Aixz-VM4jJp8nIActACrXMDfbw&s=dIgpaNQlJyLtp2AnI65CC2wCZSdArSftwoW0DaVSK_M&e=>

Latest blog post: Azure AD integration<https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth/2018/09/12/azure-ad-integration>

Previous blog post: OTK + IFTTT tutorial<https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth/2018/06/25/oauth-toolkit-otk-and-ifttt-tutorial>
Openid-specs-ab mailing list
Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20181105/a45dae4f/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list