[Openid-specs-fapi] FAPI Profile and openid scope value

[Ralph Bragg]

Tom,

Could this not be conveyed by a claim instead of a scope? i.e I require LoA or Vector of trust to meet a certain level for the user.

RB

From: Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi-bounces at lists.openid.net> on behalf of Tom Jones via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>
Reply-To: Financial API Working Group List <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>
Date: Sunday, 29 July 2018 at 20:28
To: Financial API Working Group List <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>
Cc: Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-fapi] FAPI Profile and openid scope value

why would the needs of the rp impact the open id provider?
I can think of one reason that has been defined, that of assurance.
The RP may require a certain level of assurance, vis a vis the NIST sp 800-63 (either v2 or v3)
I would recommending a scope for assurance.

Peace ..tom

On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Dave Tonge via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net<mailto:openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>> wrote:
Hi Torsten

We have an issue open to make it more explicit about the `openid` scope value:
https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/issues/149/make-it-clear-that-the-entire-flow-is-oidc

Your use-case is definitely valid and we've heard it a few times and definitely need a solution.

I'm hesitant to say that the hybrid flow should be able to be implemented without the `openid` scope value. My understanding is that many implementations of authorisation servers use the presence of `openid` in the scope to turn on all the OIDC related features such as: id tokens, hybrid flow, request object, claims parameter, stricter processing rules, etc.

Wouldn't it be better to use another `scope` value for the RP to indicate that it wants a long-lived end-user identifier (and possibly other claims), rather than an "ephemeral subject identifier". From a spec perspective using a scope value of `openid` doesn't' guarantee the RP that they will receive back a long-lived user identifier.

I agree with you that it would be better to handle both use cases from a single client.

What do you think about using another scope value?

Dave




On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 at 13:58, Torsten Lodderstedt via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net<mailto:openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>> wrote:
Hi all,

the "Read and Write API Security Profile" mandates the AS to use response type values "code id_token" or "code id_token token“ meaning an ID Token is provided in any case. In my understanding ID Token is primarily used to further secure the interaction, e.g. by providing the client with an iss claim used to detect mix-up.

Is it possible for the RP to use this functionality without the „openid" scope value? The reason I’m asking is I would like to let a RP/client differentiate use cases where it just wants to obtain an access token for API access but is not interested in the user id and use cases where the same client (now as RP) wants to obtain user id and further claims. Using the scope value „openid“ to differentiate those use cases seams straightforward to me. Otherwise the RP would need to use two different client ids with different sub claim policies for the different use cases, which most likely will cause complexity in the AS/OP's consent handling as I assume the RP would like to be the same legal entity in both cases.

Thoughts?

kind regards,
Torsten. _______________________________________________
Openid-specs-fapi mailing list
Openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-fapi


--
Dave Tonge
CTO
[Image removed by sender. Moneyhub Enterprise]<http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fmoneyhubenterprise.com%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGUnR5opJv5S1uZOVg8aISwPKAv3A>
Moneyhub Financial Technology, 2nd Floor, Whitefriars Business Centre, Lewins Mead, Bristol, BS1 2NT
t: +44 (0)117 280 5120

Moneyhub Enterprise is a trading style of Moneyhub Financial Technology Limited which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA"). Moneyhub Financial Technology is entered on the Financial Services Register (FRN 561538) at fca.org.uk/register<http://fca.org.uk/register>. Moneyhub Financial Technology is registered in England & Wales, company registration number 06909772 © . Moneyhub Financial Technology Limited 2018. DISCLAIMER: This email (including any attachments) is subject to copyright, and the information in it is confidential. Use of this email or of any information in it other than by the addressee is unauthorised and unlawful. Whilst reasonable efforts are made to ensure that any attachments are virus-free, it is the recipient's sole responsibility to scan all attachments for viruses. All calls and emails to and from this company may be monitored and recorded for legitimate purposes relating to this company's business. Any opinions expressed in this email (or in any attachments) are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Momentum Financial Technology Limited or of any other group company.

_______________________________________________
Openid-specs-fapi mailing list
Openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-fapi

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-fapi/attachments/20180729/8d48501c/attachment-0001.html>