[Openid-specs-ab] Spec Call Notes 10-Apr-23

Michael Jones michael_b_jones at hotmail.com
Fri Apr 14 05:10:52 UTC 2023


Spec Call Notes 10-Apr-23

Nat Sakimura
Mike Jones
Aaron Parecki
Naveen CM
Vittorio Bertocci
Joseph Heenan
Aaron Parecki
Tobias Looker
Kristina Yasuda
Dima Postnikov

Events and Initiatives
              Our OpenID Workshop will be on Monday, April 17th
                           Register at https://openid.net/2023/03/17/registration-workshop-at-microsoft/
                           Registrations are due by tomorrow.  Do it now!
              IIW immediately follows the OpenID Workshop
              RSA is the week after IIW
                           Vittorio will describe all the different OpenID logout mechanisms in a presentation at RSA
              There's an OECD event on privacy and security the same week in Paris
              OASIS is starting a working group on schemas for Verifiable Credentials, led by Abbie Barbir
              EIC in Berlin is in three weeks

External Orgs
              We sent a liaison statement to ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27/WG 5 (Identity Management and Privacy)

OpenID Connect Federation Specification Status
              Mike summarized current discussions about the OpenID Connect Federation specification
              Spec currently establishes cryptographic trust between participants using Entity Statements secured as signed JWTs
              Some also want us to enable the use of the Web PKI trust model
                            For instance, .well-known/openid-configuration and its "jwks-uri" value use this trust model
                           The GAIN POC uses Federation by also relies on the Web PKI trust model in some cases
                           This is used, for instance, to retrieve metadata from https .well-known endpoints
                           Tobias spoke in favor of retrieving metadata from .well-known endpoints being conformant behavior
              The Research and Education community using SAML-based federations explicitly chose not to rely on Web PKI
                            This was due, in part, due to past breaches of and problems with TLS certificates and certificate authorities
                           The Federation spec, to date, which targets this community's use cases, followed this example
              Some reviewers and deployers want to give deployers a choice of trust models
              They want deployments depending upon Web PKI to be compliant with the specification

              Mike said that the editors agree that the next set of edits will normatively add that choice to the spec
                           At the same we're not going to break anything that is already in use
                           We'll be adding choices, not removing or breaking anything
              Then we plan to publish another Implementer's Draft
              After that, unless developers and deployers tell us to do otherwise, we'll go for Final status soon thereafter

              Kristina expressed that there are currently readability challenges with the specification
                           She said that features are defined but the big picture is hard to understand
                           Mike cited the example of the Messages and Standard specs from a decade ago
                                         You had to read both of them together to get the big picture, which developers hated
                                          We therefore merged them to create Core, which was *a lot* of work, but vastly improved readability
                           Mike said that editing using PRs is like looking through small keyhole, making it hard to see the big picture
                           Mike said that he plans to review and revise the spec in its entirety to improve its readability
              Kristina asked about potential renaming
                           Mike said that Giuseppe is willing to shorten "OpenID Connect Federation" to "OpenID Federation"
                                         This would parallel the use of "OpenID" by OpenID4VP and OpenID4VCI
                           We should seriously consider the impact of changing the existing branding when the spec is already in production use
                           Kristina said that core functionality of the spec is trust establishment, and the name should reflect that
              Dima said that the Trust Registry Task Force in TrustOverIP is developing trust management mechanisms
                           The Federation spec could be applicable as a solution
                           He said that you need to be able to look up entities that you're interacting with

OpenID Foundation Process
        Nat brought up a process point about the use of "OpenID" in specification titles
              Mike wants to amend the process document to allow OpenID Foundation working groups to use "OpenID" in titles
                           In practice, this is already common usage by working groups
              Mike also wants to amend the process document to legitimize using hosted services controlled by the Foundation
                      such as bitbucket.org/openid and github.com/openid
              While relevant to the working group, these are actually board-level discussions

FAPI Profile of Federation
              Joseph asked about having a FAPI profile for Federation
              Dima said that there are profiles for FAPI such as the Brazilian profile
                           These profiles pick and choose what parts of the specs they use
                           He said that a profile might need 50% of FAPI, 30% of Federation, 10% of eKYC-IDA, parts of CIBA, etc.
                           ConnectID wants all-in-one certification profiles for its customers

We announced the OpenID4VP vote today
              https://openid.net/2023/04/10/notice-of-vote-for-proposed-second-implementers-draft-of-openid-for-verifiable-presentations-specification/
              Voting opens Monday, April 17th - the day of the OpenID Workshop

PRs
              https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/
              PR #508: OID4VP editorial after the full read.
                           Oliver created PR #509 suggesting minor changes
                           Kristina will merge it into her branch and then correct a few things
                           Kristina will then merge and Mike will publish, updating the review blog post
              PR #448: [Federation] Added appendix on using Web PKI cryptographic trust
                           Mike described in-person discussions on the PR in Yokohama
                           He described the desire to use existing metadata locations
                                         It would then be a deployment choice
                                         Kristina supported that
                           Kristina said that we also discussed the philosophy of not trusting TLS
                                         She said that there are multilateral federations that are willing to trust TLS
                           Kristina said it will confuse people if the whole spec says not to trust TLS but then allows it sometimes
                           Dima said that he sees a need to be able to profile the Federation spec
                                         He said that GAIN is using Automatic Registration and doesn't need Explicit Registration implementation
                           At this point, we think this PR be replaced by the more comprehensive edits proposed by Mike earlier in the call
              PR #463: removing the requirement around JSON-LD processing (Issue #1840)
                           Kristina said there is still an ongoing conversation, so this isn't ready to merge

Open Issues
              https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues?status=new&status=open
              #1912: Implementers that are willing to trust TLS
                           Kristina wrote down some of what we discussed in Yokohama
              Lots of issue SPAM :-(
                           Mike to delete
              #1887: Wallet attestation in SIOPv2 (implementation considerations)
                           Discussed in person in Yokohama
                            Depending upon how trust occurs, having a JWT attestation might be useful
                           (This is related to #1886)
              #1886: New client authentication method for Wallet attestation
                           This may require a new JWT attestation client authentication method
                           This is waiting for a concrete proposal

Needed changes for next Implementer's Drafts
              SIOPv2
                           Add client_id_scheme
                           Possibly refactor
              OpenID4VCI
                           Add client_id_scheme
                           There are several important PRs outstanding
                                         Cleaning up deferred issuance endpoint
                                         There are PRs addressing feedback received, including from Taka
                           Refresh implementation considerations will be added
                                         There are jurisdictions requiring periodic resigning over data to keep the signatures fresh
                           It's unclear that managing changing claim values is required functionality
                           We discussed using access tokens issued to the wallet, when the wallet can be a public client
                                         We shouldn't be using long-lived tokens with public clients
                                         DPoP is recommended for public clients that want to reuse tokens
                                         Ideally they would be sender-constrained
              Federation
                           Add description of option to use existing metadata in some profiles
                           Add description of option to trust Web PKI in some profiles
                           Technical issue about trust mark issuers

Liaisons
              Nat asked people for quick review of his e-mail "Liaison statements to ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27"
              Nat reported that we submitted several public comments on NISTR 8389 - Security Considerations for Open Banking
              We also commented on the OECD Guidelines for Digital Identity
                           OECD guidelines were influential in creating GDPR

Next Call
              The next call will be Thursday, April 13th at 7am Pacific Time
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20230414/26ee0840/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list