Su-hyeon, On the nonce half. For an unsolicited call the delivery is defined, though not in RFC 9901: RFC 9449 Section 9 has the resource server answer a request that carries no nonce, using a 401 with the use_dpop_nonce error and a DPoP-Nonce header, and the client retries with that value in the proof. So a resource server can supply a nonce to a client that never asked it for one.
What that leaves open is aud. The proof binds htu and htm, not the audience of the credential, and RFC 9901 leaves a KB-JWT's aud to the protocol in use. So is the gap you mean the KB-JWT equivalent of Section 9 -- an HTTP-level nonce and audience binding defined for a direct credential presentation -- and would reusing Section 9 be the intended answer, or does that not carry, because the challenge and the nonce belong to DPoP rather than to the credential? [Drafted with AI assistance; I have checked every point and agree with it.] Best, Jijie Wei _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
