[Openid-specs-ab] Spec Call Notes 9-May-19
Mike Jones
Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Thu May 30 23:42:13 UTC 2019
Actually, in my experience, most OPs do support configuration metadata. (You can see that most certified OPs have an entry in the "Config OP" column at https://openid.net/certification/#OPs.) I think it's reasonable to require it for this case.
For those that don't support Dynamic Client Registration, they instead will typically have a way of configuring all of the Client parameters in the OP's management console. So it's not clear to me that we should add anything to the protocol flows to work around the fact that some participants won't support Dynamic Client Registration.
-- Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net> On Behalf Of Davide Vaghetti via Openid-specs-ab
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 8:08 AM
To: Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten at lodderstedt.net>
Cc: Davide Vaghetti <davide.vaghetti at garr.it>; Artifact Binding/Connect Working Group <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Spec Call Notes 9-May-19
Hi Torsten,
On 30/05/19 16:43, Torsten Lodderstedt wrote:
> Hi Davide,
>
> thanks for the write up. I buy into it since I faced such use cases in the past.
>
> I’m not quite sure whether it is sufficient to just add another subject type value to the subject_types_supported element in the openid-configuration since this new subject type significantly changes the characteristics of the sub Claim.
>
> Today, a RP can ignore the subject type simply because all sub Claim values are supposed to be stable and immutable over multiple OpenID Connect transactions. This means the RP can rely on the sub Claim for recognising a returning user no matter whether it is a public or pairwise id.
Good point!
An ephemeral sub value (intentionally) works differently. I feel the OP should tell the RP that the sub is ephemeral so the RP knows, it cannot establish an id federation. An additional claim “sub_type” in ID token or user info response would suffice.
Now that you say it, I'm also thinking about all the use cases where discovery and client registration are not used at all, that happens to be the striking majority AFAIK ;-) In those cases it would be just impossible to signal that the `sub` is neither public nor pairwise.
So, to sum up, we could just define a subject type for discovery and registration, but also make it explicit adding a subject type claim in the ID_token or the user info endpoint --- though I'd recommend passing it directly in the ID token. How do you see it?
Thanks a lot for the feedback.
Cheers,
Davide
>
> best regards,
> Torsten.
>
>
>> On 30. May 2019, at 06:59, Davide Vaghetti via Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> on the point below:
>>
>>> Transient Subject Identifier Type
>>>
>>> At IIW, Davide Vaghetti talked about the need for a
>>> transient subject_type value, similar to that in SAML
>>>
>>> Mike and John encouraged him to write a specification
>>> for it
>>
>> ... this is what I've come up with:
>>
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgis
>> t.github.com%2Fdaserzw%2F813023b4e1c04d09beb732ef00d7c9e9&data=02
>> %7C01%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e510a
>> e85%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636948257157991434&a
>> mp;sdata=pEBD6u1kkuRLvyjUQe4%2BU7gFfqkne4pkPcB1MLX%2Fzfw%3D&reser
>> ved=0
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Davide
>>
>> On 09/05/19 17:19, Mike Jones via Openid-specs-ab wrote:
>>> Spec Call Notes 9-May-19
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Jones
>>>
>>> Roland Hedberg
>>>
>>> Brian Campbell
>>>
>>> Torsten Lodderstedt
>>>
>>> Bjorn Hjelm
>>>
>>> George Fletcher
>>>
>>> Tom Jones
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> OpenID Certification
>>>
>>> Roland created certification tests for Session,
>>> Front-Channel, and Back-Channel, which are now being tested
>>>
>>> Filip Skokan provided a lot of early feedback on the
>>> OP tests
>>>
>>> We now need instructions for testing so others can do
>>> so
>>>
>>> It seems that there will need to be some
>>> browser-specific instructions in some cases
>>>
>>> There are RP logout tests also but they haven't been
>>> tested yet by others than Roland
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Authentication Failed Error Code Draft
>>>
>>> This is issue #1029
>>>
>>> The error code is now
>>> unmet_authentication_requirements
>>>
>>> Torsten submitted and Mike will publish the working
>>> group draft
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> OpenID Connect for Identity Proofing
>>>
>>> Another new draft was published at
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fop
>>> enid.net%2Fspecs%2Fopenid-connect-4-identity-assurance.html&data
>>> =02%7C01%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e
>>> 510ae85%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636948257157991
>>> 434&sdata=DHoH3yut5W%2Bkhz48kXr7oAe%2FxldYrBj32kG0SpWWhJY%3D&
>>> ;reserved=0
>>>
>>> Torsten led a discussion at IIW
>>>
>>> A lot of good feedback was received, including on
>>> requirements for other jurisdictions
>>>
>>> It was pointed out that some proofs will require
>>> multiple documents
>>>
>>> Torsten is working on updated syntax for
>>> that
>>>
>>> See issue #1082: Support for multiple
>>> proof sources
>>>
>>> Reviews are solicited
>>>
>>> We agreed that Torsten should present this during EIC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> EIC Next Week
>>>
>>> Roland, Torsten, Bjorn, George, and Mike will be at
>>> EIC next week
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Distinguishing first and third party cookies
>>>
>>> George let us know that there's a spec that adds the
>>> same-site qualifier to cookies
>>>
>>>
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fto
>>> ols.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-west-cookie-incrementalism-00&data=0
>>> 2%7C01%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e51
>>> 0ae85%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63694825715800143
>>> 1&sdata=OAxFUV3oCfI1JtT2XDJzBrNt1UtTuvYHfIhUWXZ2TnE%3D&reser
>>> ved=0
>>>
>>> Values are none, strict, and lax
>>>
>>> Also see
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwe
>>> b.dev%2Fsamesite-cookies-explained%2F&data=02%7C01%7CMichael.Jon
>>> es%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e510ae85%7C72f988bf86f1
>>> 41af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636948257158001431&sdata=zqrTFtt6
>>> ym7EMp%2FV3sIIyVzobGdI%2FKyFJqDONWPIMCo%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> and
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbl
>>> og.chromium.org%2F2019%2F05%2Fimproving-privacy-and-security-on-web.
>>> html&data=02%7C01%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae
>>> 479e023408d6e510ae85%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63
>>> 6948257158001431&sdata=uu81%2BjwRSSVeRBRm0jOF5gCCI7aY09DxCGjLWEA
>>> TxhQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> Google is adding support for this to Chrome
>>>
>>> George asked whether this might affect iframe and
>>> postMessage communication
>>>
>>> And whether this might affect Session
>>> Management
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Open Issues
>>>
>>>
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbi
>>> tbucket.org%2Fopenid%2Fconnect%2Fissues%3Fstatus%3Dnew%26status%3Dop
>>> en&data=02%7C01%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae47
>>> 9e023408d6e510ae85%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6369
>>> 48257158001431&sdata=HY6kppsUZgnYT9Pi1L2brJafznKTD%2Ffqa8Rl511JF
>>> 8Y%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> #1083: policy_uri, tos_uri, logo_uri missing in IANA
>>> JWT claims registry
>>>
>>> Brian asked whether Nat really meant the
>>> JWT Claims registry or the AS Metadata registry
>>>
>>> #1081: Need for a persistence user identifier - a PUID
>>>
>>> We discussed that change of keys is a
>>> change of identity for self-issued
>>>
>>> We discussed the ability to add a "did"
>>> claim to the ID Token when it is useful
>>>
>>> We discussed that the "sub" value must
>>> not change at key roll-over time
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Transient Subject Identifier Type
>>>
>>> At IIW, Davide Vaghetti talked about the need for a
>>> transient subject_type value, similar to that in SAML
>>>
>>> Mike and John encouraged him to write a specification
>>> for it
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Next Call
>>>
>>> The May 13th call is cancelled due EIC
>>>
>>> The next call is Thursday, May 23 at 7am Pacific Time
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flis
>>> ts.openid.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopenid-specs-ab&data=02%7C0
>>> 1%7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e510ae85
>>> %7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636948257158001431&
>>> ;sdata=JP%2Ftb5toYxyiH20Pkislc%2FGJiMQ%2Fvr642cjB9554HmE%3D&rese
>>> rved=0
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Davide Vaghetti
>> Consortium GARR
>> Tel: +390502213158
>> Mobile: +393357779542
>> Skype: daserzw
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flist
>> s.openid.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopenid-specs-ab&data=02%7C01%
>> 7CMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7C659ae0bd52ae479e023408d6e510ae85%7C
>> 72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636948257158001431&sda
>> ta=JP%2Ftb5toYxyiH20Pkislc%2FGJiMQ%2Fvr642cjB9554HmE%3D&reserved=
>> 0
>
--
Davide Vaghetti
Consortium GARR
Tel: +390502213158
Mobile: +393357779542
Skype: daserzw
More information about the Openid-specs-ab
mailing list