[Openid-specs-ab] WGLC for candidate OpenID Connect errata correction drafts

Thu Oct 26 15:00:05 UTC 2023

Thanks Mike. This change should do it to align the OIDC code flow 
redirect_uri with the rest of the updated specs.

Vladimir Dzhuvinov

On 26/10/2023 17:38, Michael Jones wrote:
>
> Thanks for catching this, Vladimir.
>
> Is this the kind of wording you were looking for at 
> https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#AuthRequest ?
>
> redirect_uri
>
> REQUIRED. Redirection URI to which the response will be sent. This URI 
> MUST exactly match one of the Redirection URI values for the Client 
> pre-registered at the OpenID Provider, with the matching performed as 
> described in Section 6.2.1 of [RFC3986] 
> <https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#RFC3986> 
> (Simple String Comparison). When using this flow, the Redirection URI 
> SHOULD use the https scheme; however, it MAY use the http scheme, 
> provided that the Client Type is confidential, as defined in Section 
> 2.1 of OAuth 2.0, and provided the OP allows the use of http 
> Redirection URIs in this case. It MAY also use the httpscheme with 
> localhostor the IP loopback literals 127.0.0.1or [::1]as the hostname. 
> The Redirection URI MAY use an alternate scheme, such as one that is 
> intended to identify a callback into a native application.
>
> -- Mike
>
> *From:*Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net> *On 
> Behalf Of *Vladimir Dzhuvinov via Openid-specs-ab
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 26, 2023 4:10 AM
> *To:* openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> *Cc:* Vladimir Dzhuvinov <vladimir at connect2id.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Openid-specs-ab] WGLC for candidate OpenID Connect 
> errata correction drafts
>
> Regarding
>
>     Fixed #2026: Clarified description of loopback hostnames for
>     native applications.
>
> I noticed that in OIDC Core the change was applied to the implicit 
> flow and the code flow section not changed.
>
> https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/620
>
> https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#ImplicitAuthRequest
>
>     redirect_uri
>
>     REQUIRED. Redirection URI to which the response will be sent. This
>     URI MUST exactly match one of the Redirection URI values for the
>     Client pre-registered at the OpenID Provider, with the matching
>     performed as described in Section 6.2.1 of [RFC3986]
>     <https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#RFC3986>
>     (Simple String Comparison). When using this flow, the Redirection
>     URI MUST NOT use the http scheme unless the Client is a native
>     application, in which case it MAY use the http scheme with
>     localhost or the IP loopback literals 127.0.0.1 or [::1] as the
>     hostname.
>
> I was expecting that this errata would apply to the code flow as well, 
> and that the redirect_uri spec here will be aligned with the updated 
> application_type spec in OIDC Dynamic Client Registration. I think 
> this is crucial, developers today are typically concerned with the 
> code flow.
>
> https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#AuthRequest
>
>     redirect_uri
>
>     REQUIRED. Redirection URI to which the response will be sent. This
>     URI MUST exactly match one of the Redirection URI values for the
>     Client pre-registered at the OpenID Provider, with the matching
>     performed as described in Section 6.2.1 of [RFC3986]
>     <https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html#RFC3986>
>     (Simple String Comparison). When using this flow, the Redirection
>     URI SHOULD use the https scheme; however, it MAY use the http
>     scheme, provided that the Client Type is confidential, as defined
>     in Section 2.1 of OAuth 2.0, and provided the OP allows the use of
>     http Redirection URIs in this case. The Redirection URI MAY use an
>     alternate scheme, such as one that is intended to identify a
>     callback into a native application.
>
> Vladimir Dzhuvinov
>
> On 22/10/2023 02:26, Michael Jones via Openid-specs-ab wrote:
>
>     The 45-day foundation-wide review is now under way, as announced
>     at
>     https://openid.net/review-second-proposed-errata-openid-connect-specifications/
>     and https://twitter.com/openid/status/1715869175376396543.
>
>     Thanks to Mike Leszcz for making the blog post.
>
>     -- Mike
>
>     *From:*Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net>
>     <mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net> *On Behalf Of
>     *Michael Jones via Openid-specs-ab
>     *Sent:* Monday, October 2, 2023 6:19 PM
>     *To:* openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>     *Cc:* Michael Jones <michael_b_jones at hotmail.com>
>     <mailto:michael_b_jones at hotmail.com>
>     *Subject:* [Openid-specs-ab] WGLC for candidate OpenID Connect
>     errata correction drafts
>
>     This note begins a two-week Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for the
>     candidate errata correction drafts below.  The WGLC concludes as
>     of the working group call on Monday, October 16.
>
>     Please let us know if you believe that any changes need to be made
>     to these drafts before the Foundation-wide 45-day review for
>     them.  Please identify any proposed changes by filing issues at
>     https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues?status=new&status=open
>     <https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues?status=new&status=open>
>     marked with the Errata milestone.
>
>     This should put us on track to have approved errata drafts
>     published by the second week of December.
>
>     -- Mike (writing as co-chair)
>
>     *From:*Michael Jones
>     *Sent:* Sunday, October 1, 2023 12:26 AM
>     *To:* openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>     *Cc:* Gail Hodges <gail at oidf.org>; Mike Leszcz <mike.leszcz at oidf.org>
>     *Subject:* Second candidate OpenID Connect errata correction
>     drafts published
>
>     I’ve published drafts incorporating all the additional errata
>     corrections that have been approved for the OpenID Connect family
>     of specifications since the first set of candidate drafts were
>     published on August 13^th . This puts us on the doorstep of
>     publishing our second errata set for OpenID Connect and for
>     submission to ISO as Publicly Available Specification (PAS) standards.
>
>     The drafts incorporating the errata corrections are:
>
>      1. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-33.html
>      2. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-discovery-1_0-36.html
>      3. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-registration-1_0-38.html
>      4. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-backchannel-1_0-12.html
>
>     The History sections of the specs describe each of the changes
>     made.  If you want to see the precise changes incorporated, I
>     suggest using your favorite HTML-capable diff tool (such as
>     Microsoft Word) and comparing the baseline docs below to the ones
>     above:
>
>      1. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-errata1.html
>      2. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-discovery-1_0-errata1.html
>      3. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-registration-1_0-errata1.html
>      4. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-backchannel-1_0-final.html
>
>     Diffs are also possible for the .txt and .xml versions of the
>     specs; just substitute “html” in the URLs above for “txt” or “xml”
>     and use your favorite diff tool.
>
>     I plan to ask for working group review of these changes during
>     Monday’s working group call.  Following the working group review,
>     we’ll hold the foundation-wide 45-day proposed errata review and
>     then the approval vote.
>
>     -- Mike
>
>     P.S.  Our two Implementer’s Guides were also updated in parallel
>     to keep them current with the versions incorporating errata
>     corrections.  The corresponding versions are:
>
>      1. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-basic-1_0-45.html
>      2. https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-implicit-1_0-28.html
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>
>     Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>
>     https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20231026/60d54146/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4007 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20231026/60d54146/attachment-0001.p7s>