[Openid-specs-ab] client_credentials grant_type

torsten at lodderstedt.net torsten at lodderstedt.net
Mon Sep 17 15:37:42 UTC 2012


Hi John,

I agree, leveraging existing concepts is better than re-inventing the wheel.

I would propose to specify the UserInfo resource in a separate spec along with the respective scopes.

Regards,
Torsten. 
Gesendet mit BlackBerry® Webmail von Telekom Deutschland  

-----Original Message-----
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 10:49:34 
To: Torsten Lodderstedt<torsten at lodderstedt.net>
Cc: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net Group<openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] client_credentials grant_type

In some ways it is standard OAuth , but standard OAuth doesn't specify how identify the subject , request claims or retrieve the result.

You could do all of that from scratch, but it may be useful to use what already exists in Connect.   That could be done as part of Connect or a separate spec that profiles Connect.

John B.
On 2012-09-17, at 2:30 AM, Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten at lodderstedt.net> wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> ressource owner password credential grant makes definitely sense in my opinion. I'm not sure for client credentials, esp. w/o id_token, as this boils down to standard OAuth to get access to the user info endpoint.
> 
> Regards,
> Torsten.
> 
> 
> 
> John Bradley <ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com> schrieb:
> Last week I had several conversations with FICAM people around OAuth and Connect.
> 
> One thing that they do and is also not uncommon in enterprises is permission access based on client credentials.
> Think SAML Attribute query.
> 
> We do have that in OAuth 2.0.
> 
> One thing we don't say in Connect is how to support that grant_type.
> 
> It seems fairly strait forward that you would have a scope of openid and any other user_info related scopes, that nonce and state are not required.
> Returning a id_token probably doesn't make sense.
> 
> To specify the user who is the subject we already have a way of passing the required user_id in the request object.
> 
> I can see this being useful to compliment or replace a SAML/SOAP flow.  
> 
> We don't specifically talk about this or the Resource owner Password credentials Grant. 
> 
> As
> long as we don't do something in the core specs to preclude them we could put them in a separate profile as they are sort of special case.
> 
> John B.
> 
> 
> 
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> http://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/20120917/752a8329/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list