[Openid-specs-heart] Pulling out Native Apps

[Glen Marshall [SRS]]

I also agree to adding native apps.

As far as use cases for them, some will map on existing web app uses.  But I can imagine a network connectivity hub, e.g., a medical home, connecting to multiple apps on behalf of multiple native apps.  Dynamic registration needs to be a supported option, but not mandatory in HEART’s model.  I wonder what this means to scalability.


Glen F. Marshall
Consultant
Security Risk Solutions, Inc.
698 Fishermans Bend
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
Tel: (610) 644-2452
Mobile: (610) 613-3084
gfm at securityrs.com
www.SecurityRiskSolutions.com<http://www.securityrisksolutions.com/>

From: Openid-specs-heart [mailto:openid-specs-heart-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Debbie Bucci
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 14:56
To: Justin Richer <jricher at mit.edu>
Cc: openid-specs-heart at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-heart] Pulling out Native Apps


So does that mean dynamic registration would not apply to native apps ?

Or could a device/native app/hub(?) dynamically connect for multiple apps?

Agree adding adding native apps

On May 31, 2016 11:54 AM, "Justin Richer" <jricher at mit.edu<mailto:jricher at mit.edu>> wrote:
>
> From a conversation in our sister iGov working group, we think there might be a gap in the current client descriptions in HEART. Namely, native applications aren’t called out as being separate from web-based clients. Newer techniques like PKCE can allow native apps to connect more securely without per-instance registration, and software statements are going to be particularly important for these clients as well. There’s some question as to how we’ll manage key registration here, since we don’t want to encourage packing the same private key in a million copies of a piece of software.
>
> What we’re proposing is that we separate out recommendations and requirements for native apps (and desktop apps) as a fourth category alongside the current “full app”, “in-browser app”, and “batch-process app” categories.
>
> Note that we’re not proposing, at this time, relaxing the requirement that the AS make dynamic registration available.
>
>  — Justin
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-heart mailing list
> Openid-specs-heart at lists.openid.net<mailto:Openid-specs-heart at lists.openid.net>
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-heart
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-heart/attachments/20160531/ee4e0be3/attachment.html>