Torsten,

 

A colleague of mine and I were discussing what should occur when a Retail
Customer desires to change the existing authorized access of a Third Party.
During our discussion they asked "How does the Retail Customer know the
Third Party actually issued a Token revocation request?  Isn't there a
potential trust issue with the current design"? 

 

The current draft provides a Third Party mechanism that "allows a client to
invalidate its tokens if the end-user logs out, changes identity, or
uninstalls the respective application (sic)." While none of these fit the
situation we were discussing they do seem to be based on the assumption a
Third Party application will be a good citizen and stop using access tokens.
Unfortunately, none of the addressed situations require the participation of
a AS for completion, therefore the risk exists that a Retail Customer may
believe they have removed a Third Party application from accessing their
protected data, but in reality there does not seem to be a mechanism to
either force or verify the Third Party can no longer have access to the
protected data.

 

A possible modification to the current draft that would correct this
potential security risk, is to treat a Token revocation using a message flow
similar to the existing authorization_code response type.  A Retail Customer
requesting a change to the Third Party authorized access would be redirected
to an AS endpoint that would allow the Retail Customer to either terminate a
relationship completely or modify the existing Third Party access
authorization.  The successful response from the AS would indicate the Third
Party needs to remove the current Token from its Token store.  In the event
the Retail Customer has changed the Third Party access authorization, the AS
response could include an optional "scope" element, which the Third Party
would then use to obtain a new access token utilizing an Authorization Code
request.

 

There are several other potential implementations that could be developed to
protect a Retail Customer from a "rogue" Third Party application that does
not inform the AS their authorization to access a Retail Customer's
protected data has been revoked, but the above suggestion meets the current
draft's view that Third Parties should be able to request Tokens be revoked.

 

I look forward to your comments on the above topic.

 

 

Best regards,

Don

Donald F. Coffin

Founder/CTO

 

REMI Networks

22751 El Prado Suite 6216

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA  92688-3836

 

Phone:      (949) 636-8571

Email:       [email protected]

 

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

Reply via email to