Hi Prateek,

 

thouse drafts go in the right direction, but as you mention, they need
additional profiling. 

 

The drafts, that Justin mentioned in the mail before (see [1] and [2]), seem
to do exactly that.

 

With "a resource server could delegate a subset of the delegated rights to
another resource server" I mean the scenario, that is addressed by [1]:

 

1.      Client gets an OAuth-2-Token T1 with the scope A, B, C

2.      Client uses T1 to call service A (which expects a token with the
scope A)

3.      Service A exchanges T1 for another token T2 containing just the
scope B (which is a real subset of the scope of T1)

4.      Service A uses T2 to access service B (which expects a token with
the scope B)

 

[1] goes one step further by allowing claim-mapping, so that the holder of a
token can exchange it for a other token with another scope. This would, for
instance, allow for a delegation trough the boundary of a security-domain,
case you could introduce rules like: Everyone, that has the scope Projekt-A
at company X gets the scope Plans-for-A at company Y.

 

[1]  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-richer-oauth-chain-00>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-richer-oauth-chain-00
[2]  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hunt-oauth-chain-01>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hunt-oauth-chain-01

 

As mentioned, [1] and [2] are expired, but in my opinion they are just
perfect for doing such scenarios with OAuth 2 and so they would deserve to
become a standards.

 

What can we do, to achieve this goal?

 

In addition to that, OpenId Connect, which bases on OAuth 2, could provide
such scenarios, as mentioned in the mail before.

 

Wishes,

Manfred

 

 

 

 

Von: Prateek Mishra [mailto:[email protected]] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Juli 2013 18:03
An: Manfred Steyer
Cc:  <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [OAUTH-WG] SAML-like ActAs

 

Hi Manfred,

This is an area of interest to us and we have done some profiling in our
implementation.

Generally speaking, we work with the assertion profiles as a starting point.
They allow for WS-Trust
like token exchanges and (implicitly) support ActAs or OnBehalfOf.  But they
do need additional profiling
to offer genuine interoperability in this area.



https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions/ 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer/   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer/


What use-cases do you have in mind? I am not sure I follow what you mean by
"a resource server could delegate a subset of the delegated rights to
another resource server".

- prateek

 

Hi,

 

are there plans for supporting delegation-styles like ActAs or OnBehalfOf in
SAML?

 

If this was possible, a resource server could delegate a subset of the
delegated rights to another resource server. This could be a very important
thing, when one wants to use OAuth 2 within an enterprise-environment. 

 

I know, that OAuth 2 has been created for web-scenarios, but it's a fact
that OAuth 2 is used as a "REST-friedly" alternative to WS-* in the area of
service-security. 

 

Would it be the right way, to define an Extension Grants for such a
scenario?

 

Wishes,

Manfred





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

 

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

Reply via email to