*bump*. Any thoughts on this?
--
Steven

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Steven Cummings <[email protected]>wrote:

> A couple of debates have come up recently within my organization.
> First, are 2-legged OAuth authorized requests allowed to access users'
> private resources? The scenario is that the application (service
> provider) has another permission model underneath that is checked for
> the client against the target resource (after the presentation of a 2-
> legged/grant_type=none access_token). My instinct is that NO, this
> isn't okay because we're basically moving the user-grant aspect of 3-
> legged into the specialized model and calling 2-legged OAuth okay for
> accessing user-private resources. Further, the spec seems to verify my
> conclusion (emphasis added by me):
>
> "When the client is acting on its own behalf (**the client is also the
>   resource owner**), the client does not obtain an access grant." [1]
>
> Which means, the client is accessing it's own resources, not somebody
> else's.
>
> The second debate, is how should OAuth be applied in 3-legged form
> when the resource owner isn't always present. This is what spawned the
> debate above. Is it okay to use that app-specific model, which the
> user previously approved, to provide authorization codes without the
> presence of th user? The scenario I'm imagining is when the 3rd-party
> app has been approved by the user to make periodic calls to either
> contribute data to the user's resources, or retrieve data from it. I
> suppose issuing refresh tokens at the time of the original approval
> would be one way to go, but if the 3rd-party misses a refresh timeout
> they're otherwise stuck waiting for user interaction again. Also, what
> if the user-approval occurs independent of the *clients* presence?
> Then the access-token grant would need to be able to say "the user
> said you could do this while you were away, and since I can auth you
> here is a token". Am I thinking about this correctly, or going about
> it the wrong way?
>
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-v2-10#page-9

-- 
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