On 24/04/2012 4:33 p.m., Mike Jones wrote:
What specific language would you suggest be added to what section(s)?-- Mike
Perhapse the last paragraph appended: " Because of the security weaknesses associated with the URI method (see Section 5), including the high likelihood that the URL containing the access token will be logged, it SHOULD NOT be used unless it is impossible to transport the access token in the "Authorization" request header field or the HTTP request entity-body. Resource servers compliant with this specification MAY support this method. Clients requesting URL containing the access token MUST also send a Cache-Control header containing the "no-store" option. Server success (2xx status) responses to these requests MUST contain a Cache-Control header with the "private" option. " I'm a little suspicious that the "SHOUDL NOT" in that top paragraph likely should be a MUST NOT to further discourage needless use. AYJ
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] On Behalf Of Amos Jeffries Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 7:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-19.txt On 24.04.2012 13:46, [email protected] wrote:A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Web Authorization Protocol Working Group of the IETF. Title : The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol: Bearer Tokens Author(s) : Michael B. Jones Dick Hardt David Recordon Filename : draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-19.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2012-04-23 This specification describes how to use bearer tokens in HTTP requests to access OAuth 2.0 protected resources. Any party in possession of a bearer token (a "bearer") can use it to get access to the associated resources (without demonstrating possession of a cryptographic key). To prevent misuse, bearer tokens need to be protected from disclosure in storage and in transport. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-oauth-v2-bearer-19.txtThe section 2.3 (URL Query Parameter) text is still lacking explicit and specific security requirements. The overarching TLS requirement is good in general, but insufficient in the presence of HTTP intermediaries on the TLS connection path as is becoming a common practice. The upcoming HTTPbis specs document this issue as a requirement for new auth schemes such as Bearer: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19#section-2.3.1 " Therefore, new authentication schemes which choose not to carry credentials in the Authorization header (e.g., using a newly defined header) will need to explicitly disallow caching, by mandating the use of either Cache-Control request directives (e.g., "no-store") or response directives (e.g., "private"). " AYJ _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
