[Openid-specs-fapi] Berling group consultation response table

Phil Hunt (IDM) phil.hunt at oracle.com
Mon Nov 13 09:25:06 UTC 2017


Fwiw. We looked at signed http requests as part of proof of possession specs. 

The advice from key members of the http wg is that http request signing is impossible. Too much water under the bridge with isps, gateways, balancers and proxys messing with messages. 

So yes you can do it in a lab environment. But having a 10% (or whatever the number is) false fail rate in production is not usable in the real world. 

To sign requests you have to have a content type that does this. I seem to recall ws-* hd request signing but still suffering scars. 

Phil

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 5:09 PM, Anders Rundgren via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2017-11-12 20:49, Nat Sakimura via Openid-specs-fapi wrote:
>> Dear FAPIers:
>> I have started to paste the comments that I got by now into the
>> following google doc.
> 
> Hi Nat,
> May I take the liberty commenting a bit on this?
> 
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1fh09jiJGITuefXkB1Zq3oCrhHNvP5BWXDrpKPJK-5FiRE_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=43ChkaJn0AI1162Dlg47a0yRs-exDmX5IjKRo10RsZ8&s=-_n_hjGDPSb-65_v6NuK9xZgsc-2ZN6VPWaue57_AW8&e=
> 
>   "4.2 [signHTTP] is not  a standard nor it is on the way to become standard.
>    It has not and is not going under the rigor of the standardization process"
> 
> FWIW, the STET PSD2 API (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.stet.eu_en_news_news1_stet-2Dpsd2-2Dapi-2Dis-2Dnow-2Davailable.html&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=43ChkaJn0AI1162Dlg47a0yRs-exDmX5IjKRo10RsZ8&s=pyTgj5xuZ0AD3s770l7oKscOELvtX68LJtkcAhpLV90&e=) also builds on [signHTTP].
> 
> AFAICT there is little else you can do if you want to be fully faithful to the REST philosophy since a request is qualified by Payload + Headers + Verb.
> 
> Due to the problems combining signatures and REST requests ("non-standard" as you say), as well as to REST's limited usability for interactive (bi-directional) Wallet communication, I "invented" a scheme called YASMIN:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cyberphone.github.io_doc_web_yasmin.html&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=43ChkaJn0AI1162Dlg47a0yRs-exDmX5IjKRo10RsZ8&s=5riJjr107NACSCT-xVxjYuL0VTUWIOMoPiOXmJuCtjo&e=
> 
> Anders
> 
>> I have not incorporated the OBIE response ideas yet. If you guys are
>> interested, please let me know so that I can send their comments
>> privately.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-fapi mailing list
> Openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openid.net_mailman_listinfo_openid-2Dspecs-2Dfapi&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=43ChkaJn0AI1162Dlg47a0yRs-exDmX5IjKRo10RsZ8&s=RsGWklKg4SMG8_KQR0ahMcV9gnDd-zQEMNDW-RArMhw&e=



More information about the Openid-specs-fapi mailing list