draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-00.txt   draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-01.txt 
B. Campbell, Ed. B. Campbell, Ed.
Internet-Draft Ping Identity Corp. Internet-Draft Ping Identity Corp.
Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore
Expires: June 19, 2011 Salesforce.com Expires: August 1, 2011 Salesforce.com
December 16, 2010 January 28, 2011
SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0 SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Grant Type Profile for OAuth 2.0
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-00 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-01
Abstract Abstract
This specification defines the use of a SAML 2.0 bearer Assertion as This specification defines the use of a SAML 2.0 bearer Assertion as
means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token. means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 1, line 32 skipping to change at page 1, line 32
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 June 19, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 1, 2011.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. SAML Assertion Access Token Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. SAML Assertion Access Token Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Client Requests Access Token . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Client Requests Access Token . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Error Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3. Error Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4. Example (non-normative) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.4. Example (non-normative) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. Parameter Registration Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.1. Parameter Registration Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Appendix A. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) 2.0 The Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) 2.0
[OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os], is an XML-based framework that allows for [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] is an XML-based framework that allows for
identity and security information to be shared across security identity and security information to be shared across security
domains. The SAML specification, while primarily targeted at domains. The SAML specification, while primarily targeted at
providing cross domain web browser single sign-on, was also designed providing cross domain web browser single sign-on, was also designed
to be modular and extensible to facilitate use in other contexts. to be modular and extensible to facilitate use in other contexts.
The Assertion, an XML security token, is a fundamental construct of The Assertion, an XML security token, is a fundamental construct of
SAML that is often adopted for use in other protocols and SAML that is often adopted for use in other protocols and
specifications. An Assertion is generally issued by an identity specifications. An Assertion is generally issued by an identity
provider and consumed by a service provider who relies on its content provider and consumed by a service provider who relies on its content
to identify the Assertion's subject for security related purposes. to identify the Assertion's subject for security related purposes.
The OAuth 2.0 Protocol Framework [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2] provides a The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2] provides a
method for making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an method for making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an
access token. Access tokens are issued to third-party clients by an access token. Access tokens are issued to third-party clients by an
authorization server (AS) with the (sometimes implicit) approval of authorization server (AS) with the (sometimes implicit) approval of
the resource owner. OAuth defines multiple profiles for obtaining the resource owner. In OAuth, an authorization grant is an abstract
access tokens to support a wide range of client types and user term used to describe intermediate credentials that represent the
experiences. One such method is one in which the client trades an resource owner authorization. An authorization grant is used by the
'assertion' (not specifically a SAML Assertion) for an access token client to obtain an access token. Several authorization grant types
using the so-called 'assertion grant_type'. However OAuth 2.0 leaves are defined to support a wide range of client types and user
the specific format and validation of the assertion out of scope. experiences. OAuth also allows for the definition of new extension
grant types in companion specifications (such as this one) to support
additional clients or to provide a bridge between OAuth and other
trust frameworks.
This specification profiles the use of a SAML 2.0 bearer Assertion in This specification defines an extension grant type that profiles the
requesting an access token using the assertion grant_type from OAuth use of a SAML 2.0 bearer Assertion in requesting an OAuth 2.0 access
2.0. The format and processing rules for the SAML Assertion defined token. The format and processing rules for the SAML Assertion
in this specification are intentionally similar, though not defined in this specification are intentionally similar, though not
identical, to those in the Web Browser SSO Profile defined in identical, to those in the Web Browser SSO Profile defined in
[OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os] reusing, to the extent reasonable, [OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os] reusing, to the extent reasonable,
concepts and patterns from that well-established profile. concepts and patterns from that well-established profile.
1.1. Notational Conventions 1.1. Notational Conventions
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 4, line 24 skipping to change at page 4, line 30
| |<--(B)---- Access Token ---------<| | | |<--(B)---- Access Token ---------<| |
| | | | | | | |
+--------+ +---------------+ +--------+ +---------------+
Figure 1: Assertion Access Token Request Figure 1: Assertion Access Token Request
The request/response flow illustrated in Figure 1 includes the The request/response flow illustrated in Figure 1 includes the
following steps: following steps:
(A) The client sends an access token request to the authorization (A) The client sends an access token request to the authorization
server with an appropriate OAuth grant_type and includes a SAML server with the appropriate OAuth grant_type and includes a SAML
2.0 Assertion. 2.0 Assertion.
(B) The authorization server validates the Assertion per the (B) The authorization server validates the Assertion per the
processing rules defined in this specification and issues an processing rules defined in this specification and issues an
access token. access token.
2.1. Client Requests Access Token 2.1. Client Requests Access Token
The client includes the Assertion in the access token request, the The client includes the Assertion in the access token request, the
core details of which are defined in OAuth [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2], by core details of which are defined in OAuth [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2], by
skipping to change at page 6, line 4 skipping to change at page 6, line 10
was delivered. was delivered.
* The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a NotOnOrAfter * The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a NotOnOrAfter
attribute that limits the window during which the Assertion can attribute that limits the window during which the Assertion can
be confirmed. The authorization server MUST verify that the be confirmed. The authorization server MUST verify that the
NotOnOrAfter instant has not passed, subject to allowable clock NotOnOrAfter instant has not passed, subject to allowable clock
skew between systems. The authorization server MAY ensure that skew between systems. The authorization server MAY ensure that
bearer Assertions are not replayed, by maintaining the set of bearer Assertions are not replayed, by maintaining the set of
used ID values for the length of time for which the Assertion used ID values for the length of time for which the Assertion
would be considered valid based on the NotOnOrAfter attribute would be considered valid based on the NotOnOrAfter attribute
in the <SubjectConfirmationData>. in the <SubjectConfirmationData>. The authorization server MAY
reject assertions with a NotOnOrAfter instant that is
unreasonably far in the future.
* The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY also contain an * The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY also contain an
Address attribute limiting the client address from which the Address attribute limiting the client address from which the
Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the Address is at Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the Address is at
the discretion of the authorization server. the discretion of the authorization server.
o If the Assertion issuer authenticated the subject, the Assertion o If the Assertion issuer authenticated the subject, the Assertion
SHOULD contain a single <AuthnStatement> representing that SHOULD contain a single <AuthnStatement> representing that
authentication event. authentication event.
skipping to change at page 9, line 31 skipping to change at page 9, line 31
No additional considerations beyond those described within the OAuth No additional considerations beyond those described within the OAuth
2.0 Protocol Framework [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2] and in the Security and 2.0 Protocol Framework [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2] and in the Security and
Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup
Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]. Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os].
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
4.1. Parameter Registration Request 4.1. Parameter Registration Request
The following is the parameter registration request, as defined in The following is the parameter registration request, as defined in
The OAuth Parameters Registry of The OAuth 2.0 Protocol Framework The OAuth Parameters Registry of The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol
[I-D.ietf.oauth-v2], for the "assertion" parameter: [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2], for the "assertion" parameter:
Parameter name: assertion o Parameter name: assertion
Parameter usage location: The token endpoint request.
Change controller: IETF o Parameter usage location: token request
Specification document(s): draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer o Change controller: IETF
Related information: None o Specification document(s): draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer
Appendix A. Contributors Appendix A. Contributors
The following people contributed wording and concepts to this The following people contributed wording and concepts to this
document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motyka, Eran Hammer- document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motyka, Eran Hammer-
Lahav, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten Lahav, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten
Lodderstedt, Scott Cantor and David Waite Lodderstedt, Scott Cantor and David Waite
Appendix B. Document History Appendix B. Document History
[[ to be removed by RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]] [[ to be removed by RFC editor before publication as an RFC ]]
draft-campbell-oauth-saml-00 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-01
o Update spec name when referencing draft-ietf-oauth-v2 (The OAuth
2.0 Protocol Framework -> The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol)
o Update wording in Introduction to talk about extension grant types
rather than the assertion grant type which is a term no longer
used in OAuth 2.0
o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and denote as work in
progress
o Update Parameter Registration Request to use similar terms as
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 and remove Related information part
o Add some text giving discretion to AS on rejecting assertions with
unreasonably long validity window.
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-00
o Added Parameter Registration Request for "assertion" to IANA o Added Parameter Registration Request for "assertion" to IANA
Considerations. Considerations.
o Changed document name to draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer in o Changed document name to draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer in
anticipation of becoming a OAUTH WG item. anticipation of becoming a OAUTH WG item.
o Attempt to move the entire definition of the 'assertion' parameter o Attempt to move the entire definition of the 'assertion' parameter
into this draft (it will no longer be defined in OAuth 2 Protocol into this draft (it will no longer be defined in OAuth 2 Protocol
Framework). Framework).
skipping to change at page 11, line 20 skipping to change at page 11, line 37
draft-campbell-oauth-saml-00 draft-campbell-oauth-saml-00
o Initial I-D o Initial I-D
5. References 5. References
5.1. Normative References 5.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf.oauth-v2] [I-D.ietf.oauth-v2]
Hammer-Lahav, E., Ed., Recordon, D., and D. Hardt, "The Hammer-Lahav, E., Ed., Recordon, D., and D. Hardt, "The
OAuth 2.0 Protocol Framework", ID draft-ietf-oauth-v2-11, OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol",
Dec 2010. ID draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 (work in progress), Dec 2010.
[OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os]
Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler,
"Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security Assertion "Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security Assertion
Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-core- Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-core-
2.0-os, March 2005. 2.0-os, March 2005.
[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, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
skipping to change at page 12, line 6 skipping to change at page 12, line 24
Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS
Standard OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os, March 2005. Standard OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os, March 2005.
[OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os] [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]
Hirsch, F., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Security and Hirsch, F., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Security and
Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Markup Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Markup
Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-sec-consider- Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-sec-consider-
2.0-os, March 2005. 2.0-os, March 2005.
[W3C.REC-html401-19991224] [W3C.REC-html401-19991224]
Hors, A., Jacobs, I., and D. Raggett, "HTML 4.01 Hors, A., Raggett, D., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01
Specification", World Wide Web Consortium Specification", World Wide Web Consortium
Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999, Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Brian Campbell (editor) Brian Campbell (editor)
Ping Identity Corp. Ping Identity Corp.
Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com
 End of changes. 21 change blocks. 
33 lines changed or deleted 54 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.40. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/