ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com
Mon Jul 1 19:44:30 UTC 2013
In Messages 220.127.116.11 we define iss as Issuer Identifier for the Issuer of the response. The iss value is a case sensitive string.
In Discovery Section 3 we have:
issuer REQUIRED. URL using the scheme with no query or fragment component that the OP asserts as its Issuer Identifier
So for discovery to work you need to be able to retrieve the meta-data from a well-known location for that issuer, so restricting issuer to a https: uri to make the mapping simple is sensible.
However in the core spec iss could be any string as long as the client is manually configured with the correct information for endpoints and certificates.
I note this because looking at the interop participants at-least one who is not supporting discovery is using a plain host name.
Should we have a warning in messages that https: scheme URI are recommended issuer strings as they allow discovery and prevent name collisions.
Certainly arbitrary strings can work as issuer for manual configuration though as we discovered in SAML that leads to interesting interop problems down the road.
I see way to many SAML entityID of "test", "example.com", and "demo" in production. collision resistance for issuer strings is important for interoperability.
I have a feeling that the definition of issuer from JWT may be a touch to vague for messages.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 4507 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Openid-specs-ab