<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>I am not sure if we are currently supporting symmetric JWE. </div><div><br></div><div>Is not the pub key crypto or TLS option adequate? <br><br>=nat via iPhone</div><div><br>Dec 19, 2013 8:36、Brian Campbell <<a href="mailto:bcampbell@pingidentity.com">bcampbell@pingidentity.com</a>> のメッセージ:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">Currently the spec has:<br><div><dl><dt>client_secret</dt><dd>OPTIONAL. Client Secret.
The same Client Secret value MUST NOT be assigned to multiple Clients.
This value is used by Confidential Clients to authenticate to the
Token Endpoint as described in OAuth 2.0 Section 2.3.1.
It is not needed for
Clients selecting a <tt>token_endpoint_auth_method</tt> of
<tt>private_key_jwt</tt>.
</dd></dl><p>but the value is also used if any symmetric JWE encryption is used. No?</p><p>It also seems that there's no way for a client to indicate that it intends to symmetrically encrypt a request object to the AS, which I think means that an AS can't tell with100% certainty from the content of the registration request, if a client_secret should be issued/returned. Or am I missing something?<br>
</p><p><br></p><p><br></p></div></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Openid-specs-ab mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net">Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>