< draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-03.txt   draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-04.txt >
Security Events Working Group A. Backman, Ed. Security Events Working Group A. Backman, Ed.
Internet-Draft Amazon Internet-Draft Amazon
Intended status: Standards Track M. Scurtescu Intended status: Standards Track M. Scurtescu
Expires: September 12, 2019 Coinbase Expires: January 9, 2020 Coinbase
March 11, 2019 July 08, 2019
Subject Identifiers for Security Event Tokens Subject Identifiers for Security Event Tokens
draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-03 draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-04
Abstract Abstract
Security events communicated within Security Event Tokens may support Security events communicated within Security Event Tokens may support
a variety of identifiers to identify the subject and/or other a variety of identifiers to identify the subject and/or other
principals related to the event. This specification formalizes the principals related to the event. This specification formalizes the
notion of subject identifiers as named sets of well-defined claims notion of subject identifiers as named sets of well-defined claims
describing the subject, a mechanism for representing subject describing the subject, a mechanism for representing subject
identifiers within a [JSON] object such as a JSON Web Token [JWT] or identifiers within a [JSON] object such as a JSON Web Token [JWT] or
Security Event Token [SET], and a registry for defining and Security Event Token [SET], and a registry for defining and
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Subject Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Subject Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Account Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Account Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Email Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Email Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1. Email Canonicalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2.1. Email Canonicalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Phone Number Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3. Phone Number Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Issuer and Subject Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . 5 3.4. Issuer and Subject Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . 5
3.5. Aliases Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.5. Aliases Subject Identifier Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Subject Identifiers in JWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1. "sub_id" Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.2. "sub_id" and "iss-sub" Subject Identifiers . . . . . . . 8
6.1. Security Event Subject Identifier Types Registry . . . . 7 5. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1.1. Registration Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Identifier Correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1.2. Initial Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1.3. Guidance for Expert Reviewers . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. Security Event Subject Identifier Types Registry . . . . 10
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7.1.1. Registration Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7.1.2. Initial Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.1.3. Guidance for Expert Reviewers . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.2. JSON Web Token Claims Registration . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.2.1. Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
As described in section 1.2 of [SET], the subject of a security event As described in section 1.2 of [SET], the subject of a security event
may take a variety of forms, including but not limited to a JWT may take a variety of forms, including but not limited to a JWT
principal, an IP address, a URL, etc. Furthermore, even in the case principal, an IP address, a URL, etc. Furthermore, even in the case
where the subject of an event is more narrowly scoped, there may be where the subject of an event is more narrowly scoped, there may be
multiple ways by which a given subject may be identified. For multiple ways by which a given subject may be identified. For
example, an account may be identified by an opaque identifier, an example, an account may be identified by an opaque identifier, an
email address, a phone number, a JWT "iss" claim and "sub" claim, email address, a phone number, a JWT "iss" claim and "sub" claim,
skipping to change at page 3, line 16 skipping to change at page 3, line 21
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Subject Identifiers 3. Subject Identifiers
A Subject Identifier Type is a light-weight schema that describes a A Subject Identifier Type is a light-weight schema that describes a
set of claims that identifies a subject. Every Subject Identifier set of claims that identifies a subject. Every Subject Identifier
Type MUST have a unique name registered in the IANA "Security Event Type MUST have a unique name registered in the IANA "Security Event
Subject Identifier Types" registry established by Section 6.1. A Subject Identifier Types" registry established by Section 7.1. A
Subject Identifier Type MAY describe more claims than are strictly Subject Identifier Type MAY describe more claims than are strictly
necessary to identify a subject, and MAY describe conditions under necessary to identify a subject, and MAY describe conditions under
which those claims are required, optional, or prohibited. which those claims are required, optional, or prohibited.
A Subject Identifier is a [JSON] object containing a "subject_type" A Subject Identifier is a [JSON] object containing a "subject_type"
claim whose value is the name of a Subject Identifier Type, and a set claim whose value is the name of a Subject Identifier Type, and a set
of additional "payload claims" which are to be interpreted according of additional "payload claims" which are to be interpreted according
to the rules defined by that Subject Identifier Type. Payload claim to the rules defined by that Subject Identifier Type. Payload claim
values MUST match the format specified for the claim by the Subject values MUST match the format specified for the claim by the Subject
Identifier Type. A Subject Identifier MUST NOT contain any payload Identifier Type. A Subject Identifier MUST NOT contain any payload
claims prohibited or not described by its Subject Identifier Type, claims prohibited or not described by its Subject Identifier Type,
and MUST contain all payload claims required by its Subject and MUST contain all payload claims required by its Subject
Identifier Type. Identifier Type.
The following Subject Identifier Types are registered in the IANA The following Subject Identifier Types are registered in the IANA
"Security Event Subject Identifier Types" registry established by "Security Event Subject Identifier Types" registry established by
Section 6.1. Section 7.1.
3.1. Account Subject Identifier Type 3.1. Account Subject Identifier Type
The Account Subject Identifier Type describes a user account at a The Account Subject Identifier Type describes a user account at a
service provider, identified with an "acct" URI as defined in service provider, identified with an "acct" URI as defined in
[RFC7565]. Subject Identifiers of this type MUST contain a "uri" [RFC7565]. Subject Identifiers of this type MUST contain a "uri"
claim whose value is the "acct" URI for the subject. The "uri" claim claim whose value is the "acct" URI for the subject. The "uri" claim
is REQUIRED and MUST NOT be null or empty. The Account Subject is REQUIRED and MUST NOT be null or empty. The Account Subject
Identifier Type is identified by the name "account". Identifier Type is identified by the name "account".
skipping to change at page 6, line 15 skipping to change at page 6, line 15
unknown which of those identifiers they will recognize or support. unknown which of those identifiers they will recognize or support.
Subject Identifiers of this type MUST contain an "identifiers" claim Subject Identifiers of this type MUST contain an "identifiers" claim
whose value is a JSON array containing one or more Subject whose value is a JSON array containing one or more Subject
Identifiers. Each Subject Identifier in the array MUST identify the Identifiers. Each Subject Identifier in the array MUST identify the
same entity. The "identifiers" claim is REQUIRED and MUST NOT be same entity. The "identifiers" claim is REQUIRED and MUST NOT be
null or empty. It MAY contain multiple instances of the same Subject null or empty. It MAY contain multiple instances of the same Subject
Identifier Type (e.g., multiple Email Subject Identifiers), but Identifier Type (e.g., multiple Email Subject Identifiers), but
SHOULD NOT contain exact duplicates. This type is identified by the SHOULD NOT contain exact duplicates. This type is identified by the
name "aliases". name "aliases".
"alias" Subject Identifiers MUST NOT be nested; i.e., the
"identifiers" claim of an "alias" Subject Identifier MUST NOT contain
a Subject Identifier of type "aliases".
Below is a non-normative example Subject Identifier for the Aliases Below is a non-normative example Subject Identifier for the Aliases
Subject Identifier Type: Subject Identifier Type:
{ {
"subject_type": "aliases", "subject_type": "aliases",
"identifiers": [ "identifiers": [
{ {
"subject_type": "email", "subject_type": "email",
"email": "user@example.com", "email": "user@example.com",
}, },
skipping to change at page 6, line 39 skipping to change at page 6, line 43
{ {
"subject_type": "email", "subject_type": "email",
"email": "user+qualifier@example.com", "email": "user+qualifier@example.com",
} }
], ],
} }
Figure 5: Example: Subject Identifier for the Aliases Subject Figure 5: Example: Subject Identifier for the Aliases Subject
Identifier Type. Identifier Type.
4. Privacy Considerations 4. Subject Identifiers in JWTs
There are no privacy considerations. 4.1. "sub_id" Claim
5. Security Considerations This document defines the "sub_id" JWT Claim, in accordance with
Section 4.2 of [RFC7519]. When present, the value of this claim MUST
be a Subject Identifier that identifies the principal that is the
subject of the JWT. The "sub_id" claim MAY be included in a JWT,
whether or not the "sub" claim is present. When both the "sub" and
"sub_id" claims are present in a JWT, they MUST identify the same
principal.
Below is are non-normative examples of JWTs containing the "sub_id"
claim:
{
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "email",
"email": "user@example.com",
},
}
Figure 6: Example: JWT containing a `sub_id` claim and no `sub`
claim.
{
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "user@example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "email",
"email": "user@example.com",
},
}
Figure 7: Example: JWT where both the `sub` and `sub_id` claims
identify the subject using the same identifier.
{
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "user@example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "email",
"email": "elizabeth@example.com",
},
}
Figure 8: Example: JWT where both the `sub` and `sub_id` claims
identify the subject using different values of the same identifier
type.
{
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "user@example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "account",
"uri": "acct:example.user@service.example.com",
},
}
Figure 9: Example: JWT where the `sub` and `sub_id` claims identify
the subject via different types of identifiers.
4.2. "sub_id" and "iss-sub" Subject Identifiers
The "sub_id" claim MAY contain an "iss-sub" Subject Identifier. In
this case, the JWT's "iss" claim and the Subject Identifier's "iss"
claim MAY be different. For example, an OpenID Connect [OIDC] client
may construct such a JWT when issuing a JWT back to its OpenID
Connect Identity Provider, in order to communicate information about
the services' shared subject principal using an identifier the
Identity Provider is known to understand. Similarly, the JWT's "sub"
claim and the Subject Identifier's "sub" claim MAY be different. For
example, this may be used by an OpenID Connect client to communicate
the subject principal's local identifier at the client back to its
Identity Provider.
Below are non-normative examples of a JWT where the "iss" claims are
the same, and a JWT where they are different.
{
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "iss-sub",
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "example_user",
},
}
Figure 10: Example: JWT with a `iss-sub` Subject Identifier where JWT
issuer and subject issuer are the same.
{
"iss": "client.example.com",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "iss-sub",
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "example_user",
},
}
Figure 11: Example: JWT with an `iss-sub` Subject Identifier where
the JWT issuer and subject issuer are different.
{
"iss": "client.example.com",
"sub": "client_user",
"sub_id": {
"subject_type": "iss-sub",
"iss": "issuer.example.com",
"sub": "example_user",
},
}
Figure 12: Example: JWT with an `iss-sub` Subject Identifier where
the JWT `iss` and `sub` claims differ from the Subject Identifier's
`iss` and `sub` claims.
5. Privacy Considerations
5.1. Identifier Correlation
The act of presenting two or more identifiers for a single principal
together (e.g., within an "aliases" Subject Identifier, or via the
"sub" and "sub_id" JWT claims) may communicate more information about
the principal than was intended. For example, the entity to which
the identifiers are presented, now knows that both identifiers relate
to the same principal, and may be able to correlate additional data
based on that. When transmitting Subject Identifiers, the
transmitter SHOULD take care that they are only transmitting multiple
identifiers together when it is known that the recipient already
knows that the identifiers are related (e.g., because they were
previously sent to the recipient as claims in an OpenID Connect ID
Token).
6. Security Considerations
There are no security considerations. There are no security considerations.
6. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
6.1. Security Event Subject Identifier Types Registry
7.1. Security Event Subject Identifier Types Registry
This document defines Subject Identifier Types, for which IANA is This document defines Subject Identifier Types, for which IANA is
asked to create and maintain a new registry titled "Security Event asked to create and maintain a new registry titled "Security Event
Subject Identifier Types". Initial values for the Security Event Subject Identifier Types". Initial values for the Security Event
Subject Identifier Types registry are given in Section 3. Future Subject Identifier Types registry are given in Section 3. Future
assignments are to be made through the Expert Review registration assignments are to be made through the Expert Review registration
policy [BCP26] and shall follow the template presented in policy [BCP26] and shall follow the template presented in
Section 6.1.1. Section 7.1.1.
6.1.1. Registration Template 7.1.1. Registration Template
Type Name Type Name
The name of the Subject Identifier Type, as described in The name of the Subject Identifier Type, as described in
Section 3. The name MUST be an ASCII string consisting only of Section 3. The name MUST be an ASCII string consisting only of
lower-case characters ("a" - "z"), digits ("0" - "9"), and hyphens lower-case characters ("a" - "z"), digits ("0" - "9"), and hyphens
("-"), and SHOULD NOT exceed 20 characters in length. ("-"), and SHOULD NOT exceed 20 characters in length.
Type Description Type Description
A brief description of the Subject Identifier Type. A brief description of the Subject Identifier Type.
skipping to change at page 7, line 42 skipping to change at page 10, line 45
Defining Document(s) Defining Document(s)
A reference to the document or documents that define the Subject A reference to the document or documents that define the Subject
Identifier Type. The definition MUST specify the name, format, Identifier Type. The definition MUST specify the name, format,
and meaning of each claim that may occur within a Subject and meaning of each claim that may occur within a Subject
Identifier of the defined type, as well as whether each claim is Identifier of the defined type, as well as whether each claim is
optional or required, or the circumstances under which the claim optional or required, or the circumstances under which the claim
is optional or required. URIs that can be used to retrieve copies is optional or required. URIs that can be used to retrieve copies
of each document SHOULD be included. of each document SHOULD be included.
6.1.2. Initial Registry Contents 7.1.2. Initial Registry Contents
6.1.2.1. Account Subject Identifier Type 7.1.2.1. Account Subject Identifier Type
o Type Name: "account" o Type Name: "account"
o Type Description: Subject identifier based on "acct" URI. o Type Description: Subject identifier based on "acct" URI.
o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group
o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document. o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document.
6.1.2.2. Email Subject Identifier Type 7.1.2.2. Email Subject Identifier Type
o Type Name: "email" o Type Name: "email"
o Type Description: Subject identifier based on email address. o Type Description: Subject identifier based on email address.
o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group
o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document. o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document.
6.1.2.3. Issuer and Subject Subject Identifier Type 7.1.2.3. Issuer and Subject Subject Identifier Type
o Type Name: "iss-sub" o Type Name: "iss-sub"
o Type Description: Subject identifier based on an issuer and o Type Description: Subject identifier based on an issuer and
subject. subject.
o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group
o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document. o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document.
6.1.2.4. Phone Number Subject Identifier Type 7.1.2.4. Phone Number Subject Identifier Type
o Type Name: "phone" o Type Name: "phone"
o Type Description: Subject identifier based on an phone number. o Type Description: Subject identifier based on an phone number.
o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group
o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document. o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document.
6.1.2.5. Aliases Subject Identifier Type 7.1.2.5. Aliases Subject Identifier Type
o Type Name: "aliases" o Type Name: "aliases"
o Type Description: Subject identifier that groups together multiple o Type Description: Subject identifier that groups together multiple
different subject identifiers for the same subject. different subject identifiers for the same subject.
o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group o Change Controller: IETF secevent Working Group
o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document. o Defining Document(s): Section 3 of this document.
6.1.3. Guidance for Expert Reviewers 7.1.3. Guidance for Expert Reviewers
The Expert Reviewer is expected to review the documentation The Expert Reviewer is expected to review the documentation
referenced in a registration request to verify its completeness. The referenced in a registration request to verify its completeness. The
Expert Reviewer must base their decision to accept or reject the Expert Reviewer must base their decision to accept or reject the
request on a fair and impartial assessment of the request. If the request on a fair and impartial assessment of the request. If the
Expert Reviewer has a conflict of interest, such as being an author Expert Reviewer has a conflict of interest, such as being an author
of a defining document referenced by the request, they must recuse of a defining document referenced by the request, they must recuse
themselves from the approval process for that request. In the case themselves from the approval process for that request. In the case
where a request is rejected, the Expert Reviewer should provide the where a request is rejected, the Expert Reviewer should provide the
requesting party with a written statement expressing the reason for requesting party with a written statement expressing the reason for
skipping to change at page 9, line 28 skipping to change at page 12, line 28
Subject Identifier Types need not be generally applicable and may be Subject Identifier Types need not be generally applicable and may be
highly specific to a particular domain; it is expected that types may highly specific to a particular domain; it is expected that types may
be registered for niche or industry-specific use cases. The Expert be registered for niche or industry-specific use cases. The Expert
Reviewer should focus on whether the type is thoroughly documented, Reviewer should focus on whether the type is thoroughly documented,
and whether its registration will promote or harm interoperability. and whether its registration will promote or harm interoperability.
In most cases, the Expert Reviewer should not approve a request if In most cases, the Expert Reviewer should not approve a request if
the registration would contribute to confusion, or amount to a the registration would contribute to confusion, or amount to a
synonym for an existing type. synonym for an existing type.
7. Normative References 7.2. JSON Web Token Claims Registration
This document defines the "sub_id" JWT Claim, which IANA is asked to
register in the "JSON Web Token Claims" registry IANA JSON Web Token
Claims Registry [IANA.JWT.Claims] established by [SET].
7.2.1. Registry Contents
o Claim Name: "sub_id"
o Claim Description: Subject Identifier
o Change Controller: IESG
o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1 of this document.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[BCP26] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [BCP26] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[E164] International Telecommunication Union, "The international [E164] International Telecommunication Union, "The international
public telecommunication numbering plan", 2010, public telecommunication numbering plan", 2010,
<http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.164-201011-I/en>. <http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.164-201011-I/en>.
[IANA.JWT.Claims]
IANA, "JSON Web Token Claims", n.d.,
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/jwt>.
[JSON] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data [JSON] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>. 2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.
[JWT] Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token [JWT] Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
(JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015, (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
skipping to change at page 10, line 13 skipping to change at page 13, line 34
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5321] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 5321, [RFC5321] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 5321,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5321, October 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5321, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5321>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5321>.
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322, [RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.
[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>.
[RFC7565] Saint-Andre, P., "The 'acct' URI Scheme", RFC 7565, [RFC7565] Saint-Andre, P., "The 'acct' URI Scheme", RFC 7565,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7565, May 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7565, May 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7565>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7565>.
[SET] Hunt, P., Ed., Jones, M., Denniss, W., and M. Ansari, [SET] Hunt, P., Ed., Jones, M., Denniss, W., and M. Ansari,
"Security Event Token (SET)", RFC 8417, "Security Event Token (SET)", RFC 8417,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8417, July 2018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8417, July 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8417>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8417>.
8.2. Informative References
[OIDC] Sakimura, N., Bradley, J., Jones, M., de Medeiros, B., and
C. Mortimore, "OpenID Connect Core 1.0", November 2014,
<http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html>.
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
This document is based on work developed within the OpenID RISC This document is based on work developed within the OpenID RISC
Working Group. The authors would like to thank the members of this Working Group. The authors would like to thank the members of this
group for their hard work and contributions. group for their hard work and contributions.
Change Log Change Log
(This section to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as (This section to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as
an RFC.) an RFC.)
skipping to change at page 11, line 13 skipping to change at page 14, line 45
Draft 03 - AB: Draft 03 - AB:
o Added "account" type for "acct" URIs. o Added "account" type for "acct" URIs.
o Replaced "id-token-claims" type with "aliases" type. o Replaced "id-token-claims" type with "aliases" type.
o Added email canonicalization guidance. o Added email canonicalization guidance.
o Updated semantics for "email", "phone", and "iss-sub" types. o Updated semantics for "email", "phone", and "iss-sub" types.
Draft 04 - AB:
o Added "sub_id" JWT Claim definition, guidance, examples.
o Added text prohibiting "aliases" nesting.
o Added privacy considerations for identifier correlation.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Annabelle Backman (editor) Annabelle Backman (editor)
Amazon Amazon
Email: richanna@amazon.com Email: richanna@amazon.com
Marius Scurtescu Marius Scurtescu
Coinbase Coinbase
 End of changes. 26 change blocks. 
32 lines changed or deleted 217 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/