[Openid-specs-ab] Idea: client issue token themselves

Tom Jones thomasclinganjones at gmail.com
Mon Nov 5 22:02:54 UTC 2018


right, what bugs me about the UKOB & PSD2 is that the user (resource owner)
consent is not even required.
That is a major reason why i recommended that openid not approve the FAPI
specs.
allowing the OP to approve client access to my money is no way in my
interest.

Peace ..tom


On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:19 PM Preibisch, Sascha H <Sascha.Preibisch at ca.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom!
>
>
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
>
>
>
> The AS still authenticates the client and verifies the requested scopes as
> it does today. It also authenticates the resource_owner who authorizes the
> client access to resources (which is not really obvious in the diagram, I
> will update that).
>
>
>
> Details about the resource_owner may be included but maybe not. If they,
> the best way may be as an id_token. That id_token would include values such
> as ‘acr’.
>
>
>
> The client is trustworthy if the RS accepts the grant of the AS. And the
> grant can only be meant for that particular client since only that client
> can sign the JWT with a ‘cnf.x5t#S256’ matching value.
>
>
>
> I will collect more feedback and update my page accordingly.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sascha
>
>
>
> *From: *Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Monday, November 5, 2018 at 10:45 AM
> *To: *Artifact Binding/Connect Working Group <
> openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
> *Cc: *"Preibisch, Sascha H" <Sascha.Preibisch at ca.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Idea: client issue token themselves
>
>
>
> There seems to be a fundamental problem with even calling this an
> "authorization server". Authorization happens only at the resource server
> itself. The best the "AS" can do is issue a set of claims (some
> masquerading as scopes) - some of which it might also verify. The challenge
> with the jwt is that the validity of the entire jwt is what is asserted.
> What is needed by the resource server is the validity statement for each
> claim.  Including the claim that the client is trustworthy and (in openid)
> that the level of authentication and/or proof-of-presence and/or consent of
> the user was validated (or not).  Combining these various ideas might seem
> like a good idea, but if the resource server has different criteria for
> different claims, it might not be sufficient.
>
> Peace ..tom
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:53 AM Preibisch, Sascha H via Openid-specs-ab <
> openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
>
>
> I would like to share the idea of oauth clients that issue token
> themselves with you.
>
>
>
> I wrote a blog post about it here:
>
>
> https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth/2018/11/01/oauth-20-serverless-token-issuance
>
>
>
> Thanks for any feedback,
>
> Sascha
>
>
>
> P.S.: today is the last day of CA, as of Monday its Broadcom. I am not
> sure if my blog post is available afterwards at that location!
>
>
>
> Sascha Preibisch
>
> Principal Software Architect
>
> CA Technologies
>
>
>
> CA Mobile API Gateway
>
> CA API Management OAuth Toolkit
>
>
>
> Email: sascha.preibisch at ca.com
>
> Blog: https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth
>
>
>
> *My book*: *API Development - A Practical Guide for Business
> Implementation Success
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.apress.com_de_book_9781484241394&d=DwMFaQ&c=_hRq4mqlUmqpqlyQ5hkoDXIVh6I6pxfkkNxQuL0p-Z0&r=BjnOFeRZMwPBZLm00SguJm4i4lt0O13oAeF-9EZheL8&m=whHzJG0H4_GWBEIB6Aixz-VM4jJp8nIActACrXMDfbw&s=dIgpaNQlJyLtp2AnI65CC2wCZSdArSftwoW0DaVSK_M&e=>*
>
>
>
> *Latest blog post: Azure AD integration
> <https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth/2018/09/12/azure-ad-integration>*
>
>
>
> *Previous blog post: OTK + IFTTT tutorial
> <https://communities.ca.com/blogs/oauth/2018/06/25/oauth-toolkit-otk-and-ifttt-tutorial>*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openid.net_mailman_listinfo_openid-2Dspecs-2Dab&d=DwMFaQ&c=_hRq4mqlUmqpqlyQ5hkoDXIVh6I6pxfkkNxQuL0p-Z0&r=BjnOFeRZMwPBZLm00SguJm4i4lt0O13oAeF-9EZheL8&m=whHzJG0H4_GWBEIB6Aixz-VM4jJp8nIActACrXMDfbw&s=xMRzrb0tb7djuhR19fKJFgn0Ka84NWsGtIFiy-Wpp_Y&e=>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20181105/192f563e/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list