[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-introspection-response

Open Authentication Protocol                         T. Lodderstedt, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                YES.com AG
Intended status: Standards Track                            V. Dzhuvinov
Expires: September 16, 2018                              Connect2id Ltd.
                                                          March 15, 2018


               JWT Response for OAuth Token Introspection
         draft-lodderstedt-oauth-jwt-introspection-response-00

Abstract

   This draft proposes an additional JSON Web Token (JWT) based response
   for OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 16, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.





Lodderstedt & DzhuvinovExpires September 16, 2018               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                JWT Response                    March 2018


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  JWT Response  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Client Metadata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection [RFC7662] specifies a method for a
   protected resource to query an OAuth 2.0 authorization server to
   determine the active state and meta-information of an OAuth 2.0
   token.  This allows deployments to implement identifier-based access
   tokens in an interoperable way.

   The introspection endpoint as specified in OAuth 2.0 Token
   Introspection [RFC7662] is a plain JSON object in "application/json"
   format.  However, there are use cases where the resource server needs
   evidence about the fact the AS issued the access token and is liable
   for its contents.  An example is a resource server using verified
   person data to create qualified electronic signatures.

   In such use cases, it would be useful to return a signed JWT as
   introspection response.  This draft extends the Token Introspection
   endpoint by the capability to return responses as JWTs.

2.  JWT Response

   The introspection endpoint may respond with a JWT in "application/
   jwt" format.

   This JWT may contain all the members describes in Section 2.2. of
   [RFC7662].

   The following is a non-normative example response (with line breaks
   for display purposes only):











Lodderstedt & DzhuvinovExpires September 16, 2018               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                JWT Response                    March 2018


   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: application/jwt

   eyJraWQiOiIxIiwiYWxnIjoiUlMyNTYifQ.eyJzdWIiOiJaNU8zdXBQQzg4UXJBa
   ngwMGRpcyIsImF1ZCI6Imh0dHBzOlwvXC9wcm90ZWN0ZWQuZXhhbXBsZS5uZXRcL
   3Jlc291cmNlIiwiZXh0ZW5zaW9uX2ZpZWxkIjoidHdlbnR5LXNldmVuIiwic2Nvc
   GUiOiJyZWFkIHdyaXRlIGRvbHBoaW4iLCJpc3MiOiJodHRwczpcL1wvc2VydmVyL
   mV4YW1wbGUuY29tXC8iLCJhY3RpdmUiOnRydWUsImV4cCI6MTQxOTM1NjIzOCwia
   WF0IjoxNDE5MzUwMjM4LCJjbGllbnRfaWQiOiJsMjM4ajMyM2RzLTIzaWo0Iiwid
   XNlcm5hbWUiOiJqZG9lIn0.HEQHf05vqVvWVnWuEjbzUnPz6JDQVR69QkxgzBNq5
   kk-sK54ieg1STazXGsdFAT8nUhiiV1f_Z4HOKNnBs8TLKaFXokhA0MqNBOYI--2u
   nVHDqI_RPmC3p0NmP02Xmv4hzxFmTmpgjSy3vpKQDihOjhwNBh7G81JNaJqjJQTR
   v_1dHUPJotQjMK3k8_5FyiO2p64Y2VyxyQn1VWVlgOHlJwhj6BaGHk4Qf5F8DHQZ
   1WCPg2p_-hwfINfXh1_buSjxyDRF4oe9pKy6ZB3ejh9qIMm-WrwltuU1uWMXxN6e
   S6tUtpKo8UCHBwLWCHmJN7KU6ZojmaISspdS23lELAlyw

   The example response contains the following JSON document:

   {
     "sub": "Z5O3upPC88QrAjx00dis",
     "aud": "https://protected.example.net/resource",
     "extension_field": "twenty-seven",
     "scope": "read write dolphin",
     "iss": "https://server.example.com/",
     "active": true,
     "exp": 1419356238,
     "iat": 1419350238,
     "client_id": "l238j323ds-23ij4",
     "username": "jdoe"
   }

3.  Client Metadata

   The authorization server determines what format to use for a
   particular introspection response.  The decision can be based on the
   mechanisms described in this section.

   The proposal is to register resource servers as clients and let them
   determine the response format by utilizing new parameters for dynamic
   client registration.

   The new parameters follow the pattern established by the OpenID
   Connect Dynamic Client registration [OpenID.Registration]
   specification for configuring signing and encryption algorithms for
   the user info endpoint.

   The following parameters are introduced by this specification:




Lodderstedt & DzhuvinovExpires September 16, 2018               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                JWT Response                    March 2018


   introspection_response_signed_response_alg  JWS [RFC7515] "alg"
           algorithm JWA [RFC7518] REQUIRED for signing introspection
           responses.  If this is specified, the response will be JWT
           [RFC7519] serialized, and signed using JWS.  The default, if
           omitted, is for the introspection response to return the
           Claims as a UTF-8 encoded JSON object using the application/
           json content-type as defined in [RFC7662].

   introspection_response_encrypted_response_alg  JWE [RFC7516] "alg"
           algorithm JWA [RFC7518] REQUIRED for encrypting introspection
           responses.  If both signing and encryption are requested, the
           response will be signed then encrypted, with the result being
           a Nested JWT, as defined in JWT [RFC7519].  The default, if
           omitted, is that no encryption is performed.

   introspection_response_encrypted_response_enc  JWE [RFC7516] "enc"
           algorithm JWA [RFC7518] REQUIRED for encrypting introspection
           responses.  If
           "introspection_response_encrypted_response_algy" is
           specified, the default for this value is A128CBC-HS256.  When
           "introspection_response_encrypted_response_enc" is included,
           "introspection_response_encrypted_response_alg" MUST also be
           provided.

   Resource servers may register their public encryption keys using the
   "jwks_uri" or "jwks" metadata parameters.

4.  Acknowledgements

   We would like to thank ...

5.  IANA Considerations

   TBD

6.  Security Considerations

   TBD

7.  Normative References

   [OpenID.Registration]
              NRI, Ping Identity, and Microsoft, "OpenID Connect Dynamic
              Client Registration 1.0 incorporating errata set 1", Nov
              2014, <https://openid.net/specs/
              openid-connect-registration-1_0.html>.





Lodderstedt & DzhuvinovExpires September 16, 2018               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                JWT Response                    March 2018


   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC2246]  Dierks, T. and C. Allen, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0",
              RFC 2246, DOI 10.17487/RFC2246, January 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2246>.

   [RFC7515]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web
              Signature (JWS)", RFC 7515, DOI 10.17487/RFC7515, May
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7515>.

   [RFC7516]  Jones, M. and J. Hildebrand, "JSON Web Encryption (JWE)",
              RFC 7516, DOI 10.17487/RFC7516, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7516>.

   [RFC7518]  Jones, M., "JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)", RFC 7518,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7518, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7518>.

   [RFC7519]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
              (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.

   [RFC7591]  Richer, J., Ed., Jones, M., Bradley, J., Machulak, M., and
              P. Hunt, "OAuth 2.0 Dynamic Client Registration Protocol",
              RFC 7591, DOI 10.17487/RFC7591, July 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7591>.

   [RFC7662]  Richer, J., Ed., "OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection",
              RFC 7662, DOI 10.17487/RFC7662, October 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7662>.

Authors' Addresses

   Torsten Lodderstedt (editor)
   YES.com AG

   Email: torsten@lodderstedt.net


   Vladimir Dzhuvinov
   Connect2id Ltd.

   Email: vladimir@connect2id.com





Lodderstedt & DzhuvinovExpires September 16, 2018               [Page 5]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/