Agreed! Thank you all for the feedback!

On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 5:14 PM Domingos Creado <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I think those are valid points, but they can be better addressed on
> identity management forums like idsa or idpro.
>
> https://www.idsalliance.org/
>
> https://idpro.org/
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 5:55 PM Warren Parad <wparad=
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I definitely see that there is room for a potential attack depending on
>> the internal implementation. Wouldn't that be only relevant internally to
>> the auth server though? Would adding a feature flag to the discovery
>> document or visibility into configuration help reduce the attack surface?
>> Perhaps, I would need to see the explicit vulnerability and how it would be
>> potentially mitigated. From my uninformed perspective it seems like trying
>> to protect users against a phishing attack that uses a malicious auth
>> server to emulate an honest one, though I could be missing something
>> critical.
>>
>> Any additional information would be appreciated.
>>
>> - Warren
>>
>> Warren Parad
>>
>> Founder, CTO
>> Secure your user data with IAM authorization as a service. Implement
>> Authress <https://authress.io/>.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 10:44 PM Kevat Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> @[email protected] - Using forgot password and registration verification
>>> links or codes could be used as vectors of attack.
>>>
>>> One possible point of insecurity that I have seen is this: after a user
>>> verifies their code or link, they are often sent to another page where they
>>> enter more information (such as additional user information or new
>>> passwords). The user isn't supposed to be authenticated at this step, and
>>> yet the application must know who the user is.
>>>
>>> How do we confirm the user's identity without authenticating them for
>>> these steps?
>>>
>>> This is the driving factor (the "why") for this ask.
>>>
>>> @[email protected] - I agree. Which channels should we use to
>>> discuss this issue?
>>>
>>> - Kevat
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 4:17 PM Warren Parad <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think it would be prudent to potentially ask *why?* What problem is
>>>> necessary to be solved by discussing/standardizing these particular
>>>> features? There could be, but without understanding, knowing how best to
>>>> tackle it is a challenging conversation without the right context.
>>>>
>>>> Warren Parad
>>>>
>>>> Founder, CTO
>>>> Secure your user data with IAM authorization as a service. Implement
>>>> Authress <https://authress.io/>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 10:15 PM Kevat Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> How would that work? Would we need to work with W3C to ensure
>>>>> conformity of standards?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 4:11 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Although the IETF has been involved in Best Commercial Practices
>>>>>> (BCP) (see https://www.ietf.org/rfc/bcp-index.txt )  which I think
>>>>>> was the subject of Kevat’s original email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So perhaps this is a subject matter that could co-exist in both the
>>>>>> IETF and W3C?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* OAuth <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Tim Cappalli
>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 9, 2021 4:06 PM
>>>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>>>> *Cc:* [email protected]
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] Specifications for Identity Providers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think there is explicit ownership, but generally password and
>>>>>> magic link type "stuff" happens in W3C.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are existing work efforts around standardizing password reset
>>>>>> endpoint discovery, password complexity schemas, etc.
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* Kevat Shah <[email protected]>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 9, 2021 16:03
>>>>>> *To:* Tim Cappalli <[email protected]>
>>>>>> *Cc:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] Specifications for Identity Providers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this
>>>>>> is important <http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a good point. Is it fair to assume that W3C owns the standards
>>>>>> for most (if not all) standards related to Identity Providers? Or does it
>>>>>> make sense for IETF to start setting these standards in cases where W3C
>>>>>> standards don't exist?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Kevat
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 2:56 PM Tim Cappalli <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe this topic would be more W3C scope, not IETF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tim
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* OAuth <[email protected]> on behalf of Kevat Shah <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, August 8, 2021 16:37
>>>>>> *To:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>>>>> *Subject:* [OAUTH-WG] Specifications for Identity Providers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some people who received this message don't often get email from
>>>>>> [email protected]. Learn why this is important
>>>>>> <http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I propose that we expand upon specific functionality provided by
>>>>>> Identity Providers (IdPs) and tasks handled by them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To start with, there should be clear specifications for various
>>>>>> functionalities that IdPs provide such as:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Email verification on registration
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Specifications regarding "forgot password" functionality
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Specifications regarding "resest password" functionality for users
>>>>>> that are logged in
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These specifications only pertain to Identity Providers, and allow an
>>>>>> industry-wide set of rules that each Identity Provider must follow. The
>>>>>> purpose of doing so would be to standardize various frequently used and
>>>>>> implemented flows that are secure and widely reusable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some problems that would be addressed by these specifications would
>>>>>> be:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - How to securely implement functionality where a user is sent a link
>>>>>> to verify their email address
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - How to securely implement functionality where a user is sent a
>>>>>> verification code to verify their email address
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - How to securely implement functionality where a user is sent a
>>>>>> link to reset their password
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - How to securely implement functionality where a user is sent a
>>>>>> verification code to reset their password
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> 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