I no longer think there is a valid reason why the OAuth 1.0 specification does 
not mandate using a secure channel with PLAINTEXT, and I would like to make 
this change from SHOULD to MUST in the RFC draft [1].

Is there anyone using OAuth PLAINTEXT *not* over TLS/SSL? Is there a *good* 
reason why the 1.0 specification should not mandate using a secure channel for 
PLAINTEXT? If someone really wants to use it without, it's a free country but I 
can't think of any reason.

The only reason not to make the change is if there are existing deployed use 
cases where PLAINTEXT is used in such a way. If there are none after two years, 
we should not allow it moving forward.

EHL

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hammer-oauth
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OAuth" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/oauth?hl=en.


Reply via email to