[Openid-specs-risc] issuer conflict

Mike Jones Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Thu Aug 3 17:41:31 UTC 2017


I agree with Nat here.  This seems like the simplest solution.

                                                       -- Mike

From: Openid-specs-risc [mailto:openid-specs-risc-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Nat Sakimura
Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2017 1:53 AM
To: Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu at google.com>; openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-risc] issuer conflict


My preference: If all SET only supports a single iss/sub pair, then 1. If a SET can have events for multiple iss/sub pair, then 2.

2017年8月3日(木) 7:49 Marius Scurtescu <mscurtescu at google.com<mailto:mscurtescu at google.com>>:
Each SET profile must define or clarify several aspects of the specs. For RISC most of these must only be only specified (like key resolution), but there is at least one issue for which we don't have an agreed on solution.

In some use cases the issuer of the SET is different from the issuer of the subject identifier, and at least in those cases there cannot be only one top level "iss" claim.

Here are the proposals I am aware of to solve this issue:

1. Move iss+sub to the event level. The drawback of this approach is redundancy when multiple events are present in the SET.

{
  "jti": "3d0c3cf797584bd193bd0fb1bd4e7d30",
  "iat": 1458496025,
  "iss": "https://tr.example.com",
  "aud": "https://rv.example.com/",
  "events": {
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:sessions-revoked":
    {
      "iss": "https://example.com",
      "sub": "47635747",
    },
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:tokens-revoked":
    {
      "iss": "https://example.com",
      "sub": "47635747",
    }
  }
}


1.1 Move only the subject "iss" to the event level and leave "sub" at the top level (next to the SET "iss"). I find this solution very confusing.

{
  "jti": "3d0c3cf797584bd193bd0fb1bd4e7d30",
  "iat": 1458496025,
  "iss": "https://tr.example.com",
  "sub": "47635747",
  "aud": "https://rv.example.com/",
  "events": {
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:sessions-revoked":
    {
      "iss": "https://example.com",
    },
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:tokens-revoked":
    {
      "iss": "https://example.com",
    }
  }
}


2. Move iss+sub immediately under the "events" claim. No redundancy in this case.

{
  "jti": "3d0c3cf797584bd193bd0fb1bd4e7d30",
  "iat": 1458496025,
  "iss": "https://tr.example.com",
  "aud": "https://rv.example.com/",
  "events": {
    "iss": "https://example.com",
    "sub": "47635747",
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:sessions-revoked": {},
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:tokens-revoked": {}
  }
}


3. Move iss+sub to a new nested claim.

{
  "jti": "3d0c3cf797584bd193bd0fb1bd4e7d30",
  "iat": 1458496025,
  "iss": "https://tr.example.com",
  "aud": "https://rv.example.com/",
  "target": {
    "iss": "https://example.com",
    "sub": "47635747",
  },
  "events": {
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:sessions-revoked": {},
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:tokens-revoked": {}
  }
}


4. Define a new top level issuer claim either for the SET or for the subject.

{
  "jti": "3d0c3cf797584bd193bd0fb1bd4e7d30",
  "iat": 1458496025,
  "iss": "https://tr.example.com",
  "iss-sub": "https://example.com",
  "sub": "47635747",
  "aud": "https://rv.example.com/",
  "events": {
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:sessions-revoked": {},
    "urn:ietf:params:risc:event:tokens-revoked": {}
  }
}


An open question is if this new iss+sub solution should be always required or if a top level iss+sub should also be allowed (when there is no conflict). I vote for having only one way for simplicity.

Once we decide on a solution we can start working on the RISC profile draft.

Thoughts?

Marius
_______________________________________________
Openid-specs-risc mailing list
Openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-risc
--

Nat Sakimura

Chairman of the Board, OpenID Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20170803/4ed5b079/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-risc mailing list