<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Peter Williams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pwilliams@rapattoni.com">pwilliams@rapattoni.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
There is a relationship between 2 https urls (which have their own trust chains of certs), and there is a chain of certs in the xrd.<br>
<br>
Is there a writeup of the validation logic, combining all the trust signals for the signing keys?<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>There is something here: <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/oauthgoog/fedlogininterp/openiddiscovery">https://sites.google.com/site/oauthgoog/fedlogininterp/openiddiscovery</a>, but mostly this has been a discussion on the XRI TC.</div>
<div> </div><div>But anyway, the point wasn't really to ask whether the discovery mechanism makes sense (that discussion is happening in the XRI TC), but which XML namespaces to use in a proof-of-concept implementation that is supposed to showcase the state of the discussion before the spec is gelled down.</div>
<div><br>Dirk.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
Its looks rather like its setup for a saml hok type validation logic, where the ssl client has to show knowledge of a secret.if that secret is derived (properly) from the ssl master secret, such that uer-sr ssl session can validate the hok secret, folk are on the right track. But folkshave to disclose the crypto used to link the 2 ssl sessions. If the crypto for that leverages the key in the xrd's own certs, then I can see how it would all work - and I see how that can also serve as a "custom" association handle (rather than using the awful inband dh).<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
From: Dirk Balfanz <<a href="mailto:balfanz@google.com">balfanz@google.com</a>><br>
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 11:26 AM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:specs@openid.net">specs@openid.net</a> <<a href="mailto:specs@openid.net">specs@openid.net</a>>; <a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a> List <<a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [OpenID] experimental namespace for <a href="http://openid.net" target="_blank">openid.net</a><br>
<br>
[+<a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a>> for a broader audience]<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Dirk Balfanz <<a href="mailto:balfanz@google.com">balfanz@google.com</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:balfanz@google.com">balfanz@google.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
Hi guys,<br>
<br>
Google would like to launch a feature in which we're allowing our Google Apps hosted domains to become OpenID providers. The authentication part of it is pretty simple - Google is already logging in users to their apps, so we can also host an OP endpoint for those domains and send assertions back to Relying Parties. What is more difficult is the discovery part. We have been working with the XRI TC to define a XRD-based discovery protocol that would allow this kind of hosting of discovery documents on behalf of our customers.<br>
<br>
We believe that providing proof-of-concept implementations drives standardization processes forward, so in this spirit we want to launch this feature in the near future, using a discovery protocol that as far as we can tell meets all the requirements of what the XRI TC is currently converging on, but which has not been vetted as an official standard (it's a chicken and egg thing - without PoC no standards, without standards by definition no standards-compliant implementations).<br>
<br>
</div>While we were tossing around ideas <<a href="http://markmail.org/message/ixc5led2lobdwij2" target="_blank">http://markmail.org/message/ixc5led2lobdwij2</a>> in the standardization committees we just used random identifiers for new XML namespaces, etc. that we would need for this discovery protocol. Now that we're about to launch we need to decide what to call these things. We would like to use a namespace in <a href="http://specs.openid.net/." target="_blank">http://specs.openid.net/.</a>.. because we want this kind of discovery protocol to be part of OpenID, but we can't really use them because we don't have a next-generation discovery protocol yet.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
So what should we use? How about <a href="http://experimental.openid.net/." target="_blank">http://experimental.openid.net/.</a>.. ? That way, Relying Parties know that what we're trying to do is be a part of the OpenID community and bring the protocol forward. On the other hand, this would also be a signal to the RP that they're using a feature that has not been vetted as a standard yet.<br>
<br>
</div>For example, a discovery document for a domain <a href="http://balfanz.net" target="_blank">balfanz.net</a><<a href="http://balfanz.net" target="_blank">http://balfanz.net</a>> at Google might look like this (notice the "experimental" namespace and the XML elements using it):<br>
<div class="im"><br>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><br>
<xrds:XRDS xmlns:xrds="xri://$xrds" xmlns="xri://$xrd*($v*2.0)"><br>
<ds:Signature xmlns:ds="<a href="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" target="_blank">http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#</a>"><br>
<ds:SignedInfo><br>
<ds:CanonicalizationMethod Algorithm="<a href="http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/2009/01#canonicalize-raw-octets" target="_blank">http://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/2009/01#canonicalize-raw-octets</a>" /><br>
<ds:SignatureMethod Algorithm="<a href="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1" target="_blank">http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1</a>" /><br>
</ds:SignedInfo><br>
<ds:KeyInfo><br>
<ds:X509Data><br>
<ds:X509Certificate><br>
MIICgjCCA...<br>
</ds:X509Certificate><br>
<ds:X509Certificate><br>
MIICsDCCAhmgAwIB...<br>
</ds:X509Certificate><br>
</ds:X509Data><br>
</ds:KeyInfo><br>
</ds:Signature><br>
<XRD><br>
</div> <CanonicalID><a href="http://balfanz.net" target="_blank">balfanz.net</a><<a href="http://balfanz.net" target="_blank">http://balfanz.net</a>></CanonicalID><br>
<div class="im"> <Service priority="0"><br>
<Type><a href="http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0/server" target="_blank">http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0/server</a></Type><br>
<Type><a href="http://openid.net/srv/ax/1.0" target="_blank">http://openid.net/srv/ax/1.0</a></Type><br>
<Type><a href="http://specs.openid.net/extensions/pape/1.0" target="_blank">http://specs.openid.net/extensions/pape/1.0</a></Type><br>
<URI><a href="https://www.google.com/a/balfanz.net/o8/ud?be=o8" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/a/balfanz.net/o8/ud?be=o8</a></URI><br>
</Service><br>
<Service priority="0" xmlns:experimental="<a href="http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/" target="_blank">http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/</a>"><br>
<Type><a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/describedby" target="_blank">http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/describedby</a></Type><br>
<MediaType>application/xrds+xml</MediaType><br>
</div> <experimental:URITemplate><a href="https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/user-xrds?uri={%uri}" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/user-xrds?uri={%uri}</a><<a href="https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/user-xrds?uri=%7B%uri%7D" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/user-xrds?uri=%7B%uri%7D</a>></experimental:URITemplate><br>
<experimental:NextAuthority><a href="http://hosted-id.google.com" target="_blank">hosted-id.google.com</a><<a href="http://hosted-id.google.com" target="_blank">http://hosted-id.google.com</a>></experimental:NextAuthority><br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"> </Service><br>
</XRD><br>
</xrds:XRDS><br>
<br>
What do you guys think?<br>
<br>
Dirk.<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>