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

[Brian Campbell]

BTW Justin, I got focused on other aspect of all this and forgot that
I wanted to ask you what (assuming aud and prn/sub/who/etc work out)
this exchange actually looked like? The JWT Assertion is designed for
the case of trading a JWT for an access token but it sounds like you
are using it to get an id token? Is that in place of the access token
or does it supplement it?  Do you send an openid scope in the request?
Just curious really...

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Justin Richer <jricher at mitre.org> wrote:
> You are correct. I hadn't caught that, but it does state in JWT Assertions:
>
> The JWT MUST contain an aud (audience) claim containing a URI reference that
> identifies the authorization server, or the service provider principal
> entity of its controlling domain, as an intended audience. The token
> endpoint URL of the authorization server MAY be used as an acceptable value
> for an aud element. The authorization server MUST verify that it is an
> intended audience for the JWT.
>
>
> Which doesn't leave much wiggle room for the OIDC interpretation. Between
> this an 'prn', maybe this is a different kind of assertion claim, then? An
> id-token assertion grant type?
>
>  -- Justin
>
>
> On 12/14/2012 04:51 PM, Brian Campbell wrote:
>
> I believe the current wording of the specs would prohibit that.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Justin Richer <jricher at mitre.org> wrote:
>>
>> My original idea is for the Client to use the JWT Assertion flow with a
>> current id_token to refresh it and get a new id_token. This goes back to the
>> session management proposal linked to within the issue. In this case, the
>> audience for the token really *is* the client, and an AS will need to look
>> for that.
>>
>>  -- Justin
>>
>>
>> On 12/14/2012 04:04 PM, Brian Campbell wrote:
>>
>> 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
>> forum.
>>
>> Regarding the potential use of an ID Token as an assertion in the OAuth
>> JWT Assertion 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
>>
>>
>
>