+1

On Apr 25, 2014, at 7:17 PM, Brian Campbell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Plaintext JWSs haven't been free of controversy but the topic has been 
> discussed many times and the [rough] consensus of the WG is that the "none" 
> JWS alg is useful. It is in use by the finalized versions of OpenID Connect, 
> as Vladimir has alluded to. And it has been fairly wildly deployed in 
> production use.
> 
> The "Plaintext JWS Security Considerations" in section 8.5 of JWA [1] 
> represents the consensus the WG came to, which keeps the "none" alg but 
> mandates that implementations "MUST NOT accept such objects as valid unless 
> the application specifies that it is acceptable for a specific object." 
> 
> [1] 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-25#section-8.5
> 
> Vladimir
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Kathleen Moriarty 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks, Vladimir.
> 
> Is there consensus in the WG that this is the right thing to do?  I'm
> expecting some push-back on this one and want to make sure it has
> consensus behind it.  I have heard of a couple of objections already.
> 
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Thanks, Vladimir.
> >>
> >> How would they be secured then?  With the current threat landscape, it
> >> seems odd that we would be putting forth a method that is not secured?
> >>  Does this rely on transport for security?
> >
> > Yes, securing the JWS message with TLS for instance, as Mike just
> > pointed
> > out in the his response.
> >
> > JWT-encoded ID tokens in OpenID Connect is one such example, but only
> > when
> > the token is returned from the OAuth 2.0 token endpoint where TLS is
> > mandatory, clients can then register to receive plaintext ID tokens:
> >
> > http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#IDToken
> >
> >
> > There is a section in the JWA spec to instruct developers of the various
> > security
> > considerations regarding use of "none" alg JWS:
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-25#section-8.5
> >
> >
> > Vladimir
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Kathleen,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Section 3.6 - Can you explain why would this be included?  If you are
> >> > not going to sign, I am not sure why one would use JOSE at all.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps the most popular application of JWS today is to construct JSON
> >> > Web Tokens (JWT), such as the ID tokens in OpenID Connect. The JWT spec
> >> > permits plain tokens that don't have a signature and this is enabled by
> >> > the special case "none" alg in JWS.
> >> >
> >> > Plaintext JWTs are explained here:
> >> >
> >> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-19#section-6
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Vladimir
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Kathleen
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

Reply via email to