[Openid-specs-ab] Session cleanup via back-channel

Mike Jones Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Thu Mar 13 18:46:17 UTC 2014 

Maybe I'm confused, but this issue seems like a duplicate of https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/916, which we'd previously discussed and decided not to fix.  Am I correct or wrong that this is the same issue?

Responding to Pedro's point "2) The OP propagate this cleanup notification to the downstream RPs, also via back-channel (a back-channel to front-channel is not possible)" - is there a reason that RPs can't learn of the OP-initiated logout via the JavaScript session state changed notification already in the spec?  I realize that requiring JavaScript might not be your preferred mechanism, but we've also tried not to have multiple ways to do the same thing, unless there's a good reason to do so.  I'm open-minded about this, but would like to hear what the arguments for the additional mechanism are, and if they're different than those discussed with issue #916.

I'm also confused about the talk of structured access tokens.  How do structured access tokens relate to logout?  And why would we consider changing access tokens from being opaque to structured?  Requiring specific structure would break many OAuth and OpenID Connect implementations.

I'm also confused why introspection is being discussed again.  We deleted the Check ID Endpoint, which did introspection on ID Tokens in May 2012 in response to developer feedback about not wanting to have to support two ways of doing the same thing.  See https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/570.  Why is this being discussed again, now that the specs are final?

I guess call me confused today...

                                                                -- Mike

From: openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of George Fletcher
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 8:19 AM
To: Pedro Felix; Justin Richer
Cc: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Session cleanup via back-channel

Hi Pedro,

Sorry for confusing the thread. I was responding to Nat's point about structured headers. It's not really relevant to the issue you are addressing. As for requirements for the back-channel call, you can add a document on the wiki, or file a new issue on the site as an enhancement for the working group to address and then put in the ticket all the current requirements. Others can then comment on the ticket and the working group can track it.

Note, that for this back-channel capability to be relevant to an RP, the RP must support the concept of "server side" sessions (or maintain a "black list" of revoked sessions). This doesn't tend to be capabilities that most RPs support.

Thanks,
George
On 3/13/14 11:12 AM, Pedro Felix wrote:
1) Since I'm rather new in this group, what would be the best way to continue this discussion? In this email thread? By trying to produce a requirements doc on the wiki?
Most probably, I will be working on an implementation of this feature in the near future.

2) Picking up on Justin's reply: an approach would be to also use the "aud" and the "sub" to identify the session to cleanup. I don't like the idea of requiring a round-trip to the introspection endpoint in order to check the token purpose. Makes sense?

Thanks
Pedro

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Justin Richer <jricher at mitre.org<mailto:jricher at mitre.org>> wrote:
A number of our apps use this combined approach -- the server sends out a signed JWT that the client can check the "iss" field and signature, then (if it cares to do so) the client does introspection with the server at "iss" to see if the token's still valid and what it's good for.

 -- Justin

On 03/13/2014 09:48 AM, George Fletcher wrote:
On the "structured token" side of things I remember having a discussion about this at IIW (a few back) and I thought someone and written something up. It was needed in a number of cases that were using the token introspection endpoint as a way to identifier the authorization server to send the token to for introspection. I can't find my notes on the conversation but maybe someone else remembers?

I think conceptually it was as simple as a non-signed JWT containing iss and token fields. Obviously, the rest of JOSE could be applied for signed or encrypted tokens.

Thanks,
George
On 3/12/14 9:02 PM, n-sakimura wrote:
Let's just write up requirements on the WG wiki (@bitbucket).
Once we agree on the requirements, it should be straight forward to turn it into a spec.

On the side note, perhaps it is actually for OAuth WG, but it would be nice to spec out the structured (access) token. it could be pseudo opaque as well as long as you can find the authorization server from the token but we at least need to be able to find out the iss.

Nat

(2014/03/13 3:58), John Bradley wrote:

We have discussed creating a backchannel push method for the IdP to notify the RP.

So far noting is written up.  I have a bad feeling that it might be me that needs to create the first draft.

John B.

On Mar 12, 2014, at 3:54 PM, Pedro Felix <pmhsfelix at gmail.com><mailto:pmhsfelix at gmail.com> wrote:


Hi,

I've a scenario where a OIDC OP is acting as a bridge between upstream IdPs using non-OIDC protocols (e.g Shibboleth) and downstream RPs using OIDC.
In this scenario I have the following requirements
   1) The upstream IdP notifies the OP of a session termination via back-channel
   2) The OP propagate this cleanup notification to the downstream RPs, also via back-channel (a back-channel to front-channel is not possible)

Unfortunately, the OIDC session management spec does not provide any way to perform this back-channel cleanup, however I remember reading some meeting notes about this possibility.

Is there anything that can be shared? I would like to align our solution with what is being developed by this working group.

Thanks
Pedro
_______________________________________________
Openid-specs-ab mailing list
Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab



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


--
[George Fletcher]<http://connect.me/gffletch>



_______________________________________________

Openid-specs-ab mailing list

Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>

http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab


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


--
[George Fletcher]<http://connect.me/gffletch>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20140313/7538f60a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 80944 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20140313/7538f60a/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 79004 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20140313/7538f60a/attachment-0001.png>

More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list