Mostly it's around making sure you get the signature base string constructed 
right in my experience.


________________________________
 From: Dick Hardt <[email protected]>
To: William Mills <[email protected]> 
Cc: Dick Hardt <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] mistake in draft-ietf-oauth-v2-http-mac-01
 

As an implementer, I have an app that accesses 10 different resources. Some are 
OAuth 1.0A, some are a variant of OAuth 2. All have a slightly different code 
path since each resource is its own beautiful snowflake. I did not use any 
libraries for OAuth 2. Supporting MAC would give me yet another library to 
integrate with.

I'd be interested in what signing problems OAuth 1.0A has. I have my own list 
of how writing to OAuth 1.0A is hard.



On Aug 9, 2012, at 10:53 AM, William Mills wrote:

MAC fixes the signing problems encountered in OAuth 1.0a, yes there are 
libraries out there for OAuth 1.0a.  MAC fits in to the OAuth 2 auth model and 
will provide for a single codepath for sites that want to use both Bearer and 
MAC.
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Dick Hardt <[email protected]>
>To: William Mills <[email protected]> 
>Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
>Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 10:27 Aa
>Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] mistake in draft-ietf-oauth-v2-http-mac-01
> 
>
>
>
>On Aug 9, 2012, at 9:52 AM, William Mills wrote:
>
>I find the idea of starting from scratch frustrating.  MAC solves a set of 
>specific problems and has a well defined use case.  It's symmetric key based 
>which doesn't work for some folks, and the question is do we try to develop 
>something that supports both PK and SK, or finish the SK use case and then 
>work on a PK based draft.
>>
>>
>>I think it's better to leave them separate and finish out MAC which is *VERY 
>>CLOSE* to being done.
>
>Who is interested in MAC? People can use OAuth 1.0 if they prefer that model. 
>
>
>For my projects, I prefer the flexibility of a signed or encrypted JWT if I 
>need holder of key.
>
>
>Just my $.02
>
>
>-- Dick  
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to