By convincing the client to use a bad URL.  That’s kinda why we’re worried 
about bad discovery no?

Depending on the type of client authentication, the client will establish a 
valid connection to the hacker’s proxy which then replays the token request to 
the real endpoint.  The hacker now has the token.

Same thing for the resource endpoint - except worse. The hacker doesn’t need 
the token as they now see the payload.

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com <http://www.independentid.com/>[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]>





> On Mar 18, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Brian Campbell <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> How does one Mitm the token endpoint?
> 
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Phil Hunt (IDM) <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> There are two variations. 
> 
> Mitm the token endpoint is different then working one legit token endpoint 
> against another thru redirect and state misdirection. 
> 
> In the mitm version you don't need multiple AS's.
> 
> Phil
> 
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 15:04, Brian Campbell <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>> The "a. wrong AS /token endpoint" is the mix-up issue, which can be 
>> mitigated by returning an identifier for the AS in the authorization 
>> response. It is something that needs to be addressed but "discovery" or 
>> metadata aren't needed and audience restricted access tokens tokens don't 
>> help.
>> 
>> Maybe that's obvious but there seems to be a lot of confusion on all this so 
>> I wanted to reiterate it.
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:37 AM, George Fletcher <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Goals:
>> 
>> 1. Help the client not send a token to the "wrong" endpoint
>>    a. wrong AS /token endpoint
>>    b. evil RS endpoint(s)
>> 2. Allow good RS to determine if the token being validated was intended for 
>> that RS
>> 
>> Other high-level goals?
>> 
>> Use cases:
>> 
>> 1. RS that supports multiple AS (we've had this in production since 2011)
>> 2. RS rejects token not issued for use at the RS
>> 3. Client that dynamically supports new RS (say any client that supports the 
>> jabber API)
>> 4. Client that dynamically supports new AS
>> 
>> Feel free to add to the list :)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth 
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>
> 

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

Reply via email to