[Openid-specs-fapi] Alive and kicking: draft-cavage-http-signatures

Joseph Heenan joseph at authlete.com
Wed Mar 13 16:25:05 UTC 2019


I presume the interoperability issues are solvable one way or another?

The early reports about OBUK’s signing algorithm seem to be cautiously pessimistic. I’m not sure if OB gave any reasons for not using the IETF cavage draft.

I know we’ve discussed it before, but it does seem like the FAPI working group should try and favour one standard, which would also allow us to build interoperability/certification tests for that standard. I think the oauth working group feels similarly. Justin Richer pulled together some of the thoughts at IETF 101 ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-oauth-sessa-http-signing-00 ) but I’m not sure if the conversation moved on from there.

Perhaps it’s one to put on the agenda for the oauth security workshop face-to-face?

Joseph



> On 13 Mar 2019, at 16:15, Dave Tonge via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net> wrote:
> 
> Having integrated against it - the draft is terrible.
> 
> I highly doubt that it is being implemented in an interoperable way.
> 
> We need a better solution and I'm very much in favour of JSON based signatures - cleartext json would be great, but detached JWTs are still a lot better than http-signatures.
> 
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Anders Rundgren via Openid-specs-fapi <openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net <mailto:openid-specs-fapi at lists.openid.net>> wrote:
> After posting https://cyberphone.github.io/ietf-signed-http-requests/hotrfc-shreq.pdf <https://cyberphone.github.io/ietf-signed-http-requests/hotrfc-shreq.pdf> in the https://open-banking-global.slack.com <https://open-banking-global.slack.com/> forum it became clear that quite a bunch of API builders in the financial sector (including Starling) indeed have settled on https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cavage-http-signatures-10 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cavage-http-signatures-10>.
> 
> Under those circumstances it seems a bit premature suggesting that other entities should not use it.  That a draft has expired doesn't make it worthless.
> 
> What's surprising is that I found no traces of any discussions within the IETF regarding this draft (which IMO doesn't look that bad).
> 
> Note: I'm not advocating for adoption of http-signatures, but for a more open discussion about the alternatives.
> 
> Thanx,
> Anders
> _______________________________________________
> 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 <http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-fapi>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Tonge
> CTO
>  <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fmoneyhubenterprise.com%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGUnR5opJv5S1uZOVg8aISwPKAv3A>
> Moneyhub Financial Technology, 5th Floor, 10 Temple Back, Bristol, BS1 6FL
> 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 809360) 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 Moneyhub Financial Technology Limited or of any other group company.
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-fapi mailing list
> 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/20190313/77732159/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-fapi mailing list