draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-15.txt   draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-16.txt 
OAuth Working Group B. Campbell OAuth Working Group B. Campbell
Internet-Draft Ping Identity Internet-Draft Ping Identity
Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore Intended status: Standards Track C. Mortimore
Expires: May 11, 2013 Salesforce Expires: September 30, 2013 Salesforce
November 7, 2012 M.B. Jones
Microsoft
March 29, 2013
SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth 2.0 SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-15 Grants
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-16
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
a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use a means for requesting an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use
as a means of client authentication. as a means of client authentication.
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.
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 May 11, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 30, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions . . . . . 4 2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions . . . . . 4
2.1. Using SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants . . . . . . 4 2.1. Using SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants . . . . . . 4
2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication . . . . . 5 2.2. Using SAML Assertions for Client Authentication . . . . . 5
3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1. Authorization Grant Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2. Client Authentication Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Authorization Grant Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer . . . . . . 10 7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth
6.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of :grant-type:saml2-bearer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer . 10 7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 :client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
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 [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] is an XML-based framework that allows
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 Authorization Protocol [RFC6749] provides a method for The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749] provides a method for
making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an access making authenticated HTTP requests to a resource using an access
token. Access tokens are issued to third-party clients by an 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. In OAuth, an authorization grant is an abstract the resource owner. In OAuth, an authorization grant is an abstract
term used to describe intermediate credentials that represent the term used to describe intermediate credentials that represent the
resource owner authorization. An authorization grant is used by the resource owner authorization. An authorization grant is used by the
client to obtain an access token. Several authorization grant types client to obtain an access token. Several authorization grant types
are defined to support a wide range of client types and user are defined to support a wide range of client types and user
experiences. OAuth also allows for the definition of new extension experiences. OAuth also allows for the definition of new extension
grant types to support additional clients or to provide a bridge grant types to support additional clients or to provide a bridge
between OAuth and other trust frameworks. Finally, OAuth allows the between OAuth and other trust frameworks. Finally, OAuth allows the
definition of additional authentication mechanisms to be used by definition of additional authentication mechanisms to be used by
clients when interacting with the authorization server. clients when interacting with the authorization server.
The OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] is an The Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification is an
abstract extension to OAuth 2.0 that provides a general framework for abstract extension to OAuth 2.0 that provides a general framework for
the use of Assertions as client credentials and/or authorization the use of Assertions as client credentials and/or authorization
grants with OAuth 2.0. This specification profiles the OAuth 2.0 grants with OAuth 2.0. This specification profiles the Assertion
Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] to define an extension Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
grant type that uses a SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion to request an OAuth Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification to define an
2.0 access token as well as for use as client credentials. The extension grant type that uses a SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion to request
format and processing rules for the SAML Assertion defined in this an OAuth 2.0 access token as well as for use as client credentials.
specification are intentionally similar, though not identical, to The format and processing rules for the SAML Assertion defined in
those in the Web Browser SSO Profile defined in SAML Profiles this specification are intentionally similar, though not identical,
[OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os]. This specification is reusing, to the to those in the Web Browser SSO Profile defined in the SAML Profiles
extent reasonable, concepts and patterns from that well-established [OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os] specification. This specification is
Profile. reusing, to the extent reasonable, concepts and patterns from that
well-established Profile.
This document defines how a SAML Assertion can be used to request an This document defines how a SAML Assertion can be used to request an
access token when a client wishes to utilize an existing trust access token when a client wishes to utilize an existing trust
relationship, expressed through the semantics of (and digital relationship, expressed through the semantics of (and digital
signature calculated over) the SAML Assertion, without a direct user signature or keyed message digest calculated over) the SAML
approval step at the authorization server. It also defines how a Assertion, without a direct user approval step at the authorization
SAML Assertion can be used as a client authentication mechanism. The server. It also defines how a SAML Assertion can be used as a client
use of an Assertion for client authentication is orthogonal to and authentication mechanism. The use of an Assertion for client
separable from using an Assertion as an authorization grant. They authentication is orthogonal to and separable from using an Assertion
can be used either in combination or separately. Client assertion as an authorization grant. They can be used either in combination or
authentication is nothing more than an alternative way for a client separately. Client assertion authentication is nothing more than an
to authenticate to the token endpoint and must be used in conjunction alternative way for a client to authenticate to the token endpoint
with some grant type to form a complete and meaningful protocol and must be used in conjunction with some grant type to form a
request. Assertion authorization grants may be used with or without complete and meaningful protocol request. Assertion authorization
client authentication or identification. Whether or not client grants may be used with or without client authentication or
authentication is needed in conjunction with an assertion identification. Whether or not client authentication is needed in
authorization grant, as well as the supported types of client conjunction with an assertion authorization grant, as well as the
authentication, are policy decisions at the discretion of the supported types of client authentication, are policy decisions at the
authorization server. discretion of the authorization server.
The process by which the client obtains the SAML Assertion, prior to The process by which the client obtains the SAML Assertion, prior to
exchanging it with the authorization server or using it for client exchanging it with the authorization server or using it for client
authentication, is out of scope. authentication, is out of scope.
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].
Unless otherwise noted, all the protocol parameter names and values Unless otherwise noted, all the protocol parameter names and values
are case sensitive. are case sensitive.
1.2. Terminology 1.2. Terminology
All terms are as defined in The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol All terms are as defined in The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework
[RFC6749], OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], [RFC6749], the Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client
and Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) 2.0 Authentication and Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions],
[OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os]. and the Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) 2.0
[OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] specifications.
2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions 2. HTTP Parameter Bindings for Transporting Assertions
The OAuth 2.0 Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] defines The Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
generic HTTP parameters for transporting Assertions during Authorization Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification
interactions with a token endpoint. This section defines the values defines generic HTTP parameters for transporting Assertions during
of those parameters for use with SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertions. interactions with a token endpoint. This section defines specific
parameters and treatments of those parameters for use with SAML 2.0
Bearer Assertions.
2.1. Using SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants 2.1. Using SAML Assertions as Authorization Grants
To use a SAML Bearer Assertion as an authorization grant, use the To use a SAML Bearer Assertion as an authorization grant, use an
following parameter values and encodings. access token request as defined in Section 4 of the Assertion
Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification with the following
specific parameter values and encodings.
The value of the "grant_type" parameter MUST be The value of the "grant_type" parameter MUST be
"urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer". "urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer".
The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single SAML 2.0 The value of the "assertion" parameter MUST contain a single SAML 2.0
Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded using Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded using
base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in Section 5 base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in Section 5
of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to zero. To of RFC 4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to zero. To
avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by "application/ avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by "application/x-www-
x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for example), the form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for example), the
base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and pad characters base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and pad characters
("=") SHOULD NOT be included. ("=") SHOULD NOT be included.
The "scope" parameter may be used, as defined in the Assertion
Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] specification, to indicate the
requested scope.
Authentication of the client is optional, as described in
Section 3.2.1 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] and consequently, the
"client_id" is only needed when a form of client authentication that
relies on the parameter is used.
The following non-normative example demonstrates an Access Token The following non-normative example demonstrates an Access Token
Request with an assertion as an authorization grant (with extra line Request with an assertion as an authorization grant (with extra line
breaks for display purposes only): breaks for display purposes only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: as.example.com Host: as.example.com
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2-bearer& grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2-bearer&
assertion=PHNhbWxwOl...[omitted for brevity]...ZT4 assertion=PHNhbWxwOl...[omitted for brevity]...ZT4
skipping to change at page 5, line 39 skipping to change at page 5, line 46
To use a SAML Bearer Assertion for client authentication, use the To use a SAML Bearer Assertion for client authentication, use the
following parameter values and encodings. following parameter values and encodings.
The value of the "client_assertion_type" parameter MUST be The value of the "client_assertion_type" parameter MUST be
"urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer". "urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer".
The value of the "client_assertion" parameter MUST contain a single The value of the "client_assertion" parameter MUST contain a single
SAML 2.0 Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded SAML 2.0 Assertion. The SAML Assertion XML data MUST be encoded
using base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in using base64url, where the encoding adheres to the definition in
Section 5 of RFC4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to Section 5 of RFC 4648 [RFC4648] and where the padding bits are set to
zero. To avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by zero. To avoid the need for subsequent encoding steps (by
"application/x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" [W3C.REC-html401-19991224], for
example), the base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and example), the base64url encoded data SHOULD NOT be line wrapped and
pad characters ("=") SHOULD NOT be included. pad characters ("=") SHOULD NOT be included.
The following non-normative example demonstrates a client The following non-normative example demonstrates a client
authenticating using an assertion during the presentation of an authenticating using an assertion during the presentation of an
authorization code grant in an Access Token Request (with extra line authorization code grant in an Access Token Request (with extra line
breaks for display purposes only): breaks for display purposes only):
skipping to change at page 6, line 17 skipping to change at page 6, line 22
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=authorization_code& grant_type=authorization_code&
code=vAZEIHjQTHuGgaSvyW9hO0RpusLzkvTOww3trZBxZpo& code=vAZEIHjQTHuGgaSvyW9hO0RpusLzkvTOww3trZBxZpo&
client_assertion_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth client_assertion_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth
%3Aclient-assertion-type%3Asaml2-bearer& %3Aclient-assertion-type%3Asaml2-bearer&
client_assertion=PHNhbW...[omitted for brevity]...ZT client_assertion=PHNhbW...[omitted for brevity]...ZT
3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements 3. Assertion Format and Processing Requirements
In order to issue an access token response as described in The OAuth In order to issue an access token response as described in OAuth 2.0
2.0 Authorization Protocol [RFC6749] or to rely on an Assertion for [RFC6749] or to rely on an Assertion for client authentication, the
client authentication, the authorization server MUST validate the authorization server MUST validate the Assertion according to the
Assertion according to the criteria below. Application of additional criteria below. Application of additional restrictions and policy
restrictions and policy are at the discretion of the authorization are at the discretion of the authorization server.
server.
o The Assertion's <Issuer> element MUST contain a unique identifier 1. The Assertion's <Issuer> element MUST contain a unique
for the entity that issued the Assertion. identifier for the entity that issued the Assertion.
o The Assertion MUST contain <Conditions> element with an 2. The Assertion MUST contain a <Conditions> element with an
<AudienceRestriction> element with an <Audience> element <AudienceRestriction> element with an <Audience> element that
containing a URI reference that identifies the authorization identifies the authorization server as an intended audience.
server, or the service provider SAML entity of its controlling Section 2.5.1.4 of Assertions and Protocols for the OASIS
domain, as an intended audience. The token endpoint URL of the Security Assertion Markup Language [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os]
authorization server MAY be used as an acceptable value for an defines the <AudienceRestriction> and <Audience> elements and,
<Audience> element. The authorization server MUST verify that it in addition to the URI references discussed there, the token
is an intended audience for the Assertion. endpoint URL of the authorization server MAY be used as a URI
that identifies the authorization server as an intended
audience. Assertions that do not identify the Authorization
Server as an intended audience MUST be rejected.
o The Assertion MUST contain a <Subject> element. The subject MAY 3. The Assertion MUST contain a <Subject> element. The subject MAY
identify the resource owner for whom the access token is being identify the resource owner for Additional information
requested. For client authentication, the Subject MUST be the identifying the subject/principal of the transaction MAY be
"client_id" of the OAuth client. When using an Assertion as an included in an <AttributeStatement>.
authorization grant, the Subject SHOULD identify an authorized
accessor for whom the access token is being requested (typically
the resource owner, or an authorized delegate). Additional
information identifying the subject/principal of the transaction
MAY be included in an <AttributeStatement>.
o The Assertion MUST have an expiry that limits the time window a. When using an Assertion as an authorization grant, the
during which it can be used. The expiry can be expressed either Subject SHOULD identify an authorized accessor for whom the
as the NotOnOrAfter attribute of the <Conditions> element or as access token is being requested (typically the resource
the NotOnOrAfter attribute of a suitable <SubjectConfirmationData> owner, or an authorized delegate).
element.
o The <Subject> element MUST contain at least one b. For client authentication, the Subject MUST be the
<SubjectConfirmation> element that allows the authorization server "client_id" of the OAuth client.
to confirm it as a Bearer Assertion. Such a <SubjectConfirmation>
element MUST have a Method attribute with a value of
"urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer". The
<SubjectConfirmation> element MUST contain a
<SubjectConfirmationData> element, unless the Assertion has a
suitable NotOnOrAfter attribute on the <Conditions> element, in
which case the <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY be omitted.
When present, the <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a
Recipient attribute with a value indicating the token endpoint URL
of the authorization server (or an acceptable alias). The
authorization server MUST verify that the value of the Recipient
attribute matches the token endpoint URL (or an acceptable alias)
to which the Assertion was delivered. The
<SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a NotOnOrAfter
attribute that limits the window during which the Assertion can be
confirmed. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY also contain
an Address attribute limiting the client address from which the
Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the Address is at the
discretion of the authorization server.
o The authorization server MUST verify that the NotOnOrAfter instant 4. The Assertion MUST have an expiry that limits the time window
has not passed, subject to allowable clock skew between systems. during which it can be used. The expiry can be expressed either
An invalid NotOnOrAfter instant on the <Conditions> element as the NotOnOrAfter attribute of the <Conditions> element or as
invalidates the entire Assertion. An invalid NotOnOrAfter instant the NotOnOrAfter attribute of a suitable
on a <SubjectConfirmationData> element only invalidates the <SubjectConfirmationData> element.
individual <SubjectConfirmation>. The authorization server MAY
reject Assertions with a NotOnOrAfter instant that is unreasonably
far in the future. The authorization server MAY ensure that
Bearer Assertions are not replayed, by maintaining the set of used
ID values for the length of time for which the Assertion would be
considered valid based on the applicable NotOnOrAfter instant.
o If the Assertion issuer authenticated the subject, the Assertion 5. The <Subject> element MUST contain at least one
SHOULD contain a single <AuthnStatement> representing that <SubjectConfirmation> element that allows the authorization
authentication event. server to confirm it as a Bearer Assertion. Such a
<SubjectConfirmation> element MUST have a Method attribute with
a value of "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer". The
<SubjectConfirmation> element MUST contain a
<SubjectConfirmationData> element, unless the Assertion has a
suitable NotOnOrAfter attribute on the <Conditions> element, in
which case the <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY be omitted.
When present, the <SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a
Recipient attribute with a value indicating the token endpoint
URL of the authorization server (or an acceptable alias). The
authorization server MUST verify that the value of the Recipient
attribute matches the token endpoint URL (or an acceptable
alias) to which the Assertion was delivered. The
<SubjectConfirmationData> element MUST have a NotOnOrAfter
attribute that limits the window during which the Assertion can
be confirmed. The <SubjectConfirmationData> element MAY also
contain an Address attribute limiting the client address from
which the Assertion can be delivered. Verification of the
Address is at the discretion of the authorization server.
o If the Assertion was issued with the intention that the presenter 6. The authorization server MUST verify that the NotOnOrAfter
act autonomously on behalf of the subject, an <AuthnStatement> instant has not passed, subject to allowable clock skew between
SHOULD NOT be included. The presenter SHOULD be identified in the systems. An invalid NotOnOrAfter instant on the <Conditions>
<NameID> or similar element, the <SubjectConfirmation> element, or element invalidates the entire Assertion. An invalid
by other available means like [OASIS.saml-deleg-cs]. NotOnOrAfter instant on a <SubjectConfirmationData> element only
invalidates the individual <SubjectConfirmation>. The
authorization server MAY reject Assertions with a NotOnOrAfter
instant that is unreasonably far in the future. The
authorization server MAY ensure that Bearer Assertions are not
replayed, by maintaining the set of used ID values for the
length of time for which the Assertion would be considered valid
based on the applicable NotOnOrAfter instant.
o Other statements, in particular <AttributeStatement> elements, MAY 7. If the Assertion issuer authenticated the subject, the Assertion
be included in the Assertion. SHOULD contain a single <AuthnStatement> representing that
authentication event.
o The Assertion MUST be digitally signed by the issuer and the 8. If the Assertion was issued with the intention that the
authorization server MUST verify the signature. presenter act autonomously on behalf of the subject, an
<AuthnStatement> SHOULD NOT be included. The presenter SHOULD
be identified in the <NameID> or similar element in the
<SubjectConfirmation> element, or by other available means like
SAML V2.0 Condition for Delegation Restriction
[OASIS.saml-deleg-cs].
o Encrypted elements MAY appear in place of their plain text 9. Other statements, in particular <AttributeStatement> elements,
counterparts as defined in [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os]. MAY be included in the Assertion.
o The authorization server MUST verify that the Assertion is valid 10. The Assertion MUST be digitally signed or have a keyed message
in all other respects per [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os], such as (but digest applied by the issuer. The authorization server MUST
not limited to) evaluating all content within the Conditions reject assertions with an invalid signature or keyed message
element including the NotOnOrAfter and NotBefore attributes, digest.
rejecting unknown condition types, etc.
11. Encrypted elements MAY appear in place of their plain text
counterparts as defined in [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os].
12. The authorization server MUST verify that the Assertion is valid
in all other respects per [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os], such as (but
not limited to) evaluating all content within the Conditions
element including the NotOnOrAfter and NotBefore attributes,
rejecting unknown condition types, etc.
3.1. Authorization Grant Processing 3.1. Authorization Grant Processing
If present, the authorization server MUST also validate the client Assertion authorization grants may be used with or without client
credentials. authentication or identification. Whether or not client
authentication is needed in conjunction with an assertion
authorization grant, as well as the supported types of client
authentication, are policy decisions at the discretion of the
authorization server. However, if client credentials are present in
the request, the authorization server MUST validate them.
If the Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation If the Assertion is not valid, or its subject confirmation
requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct requirements cannot be met, the authorization server MUST construct
an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749]. The value of an error response as defined in OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749]. The value of
the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_grant" error code. The the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_grant" error code. The
authorization server MAY include additional information regarding the authorization server MAY include additional information regarding the
reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the
"error_description" or "error_uri" parameters. "error_description" or "error_uri" parameters.
For example: For example:
skipping to change at page 9, line 10 skipping to change at page 9, line 29
the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_client" error code. The the "error" parameter MUST be the "invalid_client" error code. The
authorization server MAY include additional information regarding the authorization server MAY include additional information regarding the
reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the reasons the Assertion was considered invalid using the
"error_description" or "error_uri" parameters. "error_description" or "error_uri" parameters.
4. Authorization Grant Example 4. Authorization Grant Example
Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a Though non-normative, the following examples illustrate what a
conforming Assertion and access token request would look like. conforming Assertion and access token request would look like.
The example shows an assertion issued and signed by the SAML Identity
Provider identified as "https://saml-idp.example.com". The subject
of the assertion is identified by email address as
"brian@example.com", who authenticated to the Identity Provider by
means of a digital signature where the key was validated as part of
an X.509 Public Key Infrastructure. The intended audience of the
assertion is "https://saml-sp.example.net", which is an identifier
for a SAML Service Provider with which the authorization server
identifies itself. The assertion is sent as part of an access token
request to the authorization server's token endpoint at "https://
authz.example.net/token.oauth2".
Below is an example SAML 2.0 Assertion (whitespace formatting is for Below is an example SAML 2.0 Assertion (whitespace formatting is for
display purposes only): display purposes only):
<Assertion IssueInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.619Z" <Assertion IssueInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.619Z"
ID="ef1xsbZxPV2oqjd7HTLRLIBlBb7" ID="ef1xsbZxPV2oqjd7HTLRLIBlBb7"
Version="2.0" Version="2.0"
xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion"> xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion">
<Issuer>https://saml-idp.example.com</Issuer> <Issuer>https://saml-idp.example.com</Issuer>
<ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#"> <ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#">
[...omitted for brevity...] [...omitted for brevity...]
</ds:Signature> </ds:Signature>
<Subject> <Subject>
<NameID <NameID
Format="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:emailAddress"> Format="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:emailAddress">
brian@example.com brian@example.com
</NameID> </NameID>
<SubjectConfirmation <SubjectConfirmation
Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer"> Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">
<SubjectConfirmationData <SubjectConfirmationData
NotOnOrAfter="2010-10-01T20:12:34.619Z" NotOnOrAfter="2010-10-01T20:12:34.619Z"
Recipient="https://authz.example.net/token.oauth2"/> Recipient="https://authz.example.net/token.oauth2"/>
</SubjectConfirmation> </SubjectConfirmation>
</Subject> </Subject>
<Conditions> <Conditions>
<AudienceRestriction> <AudienceRestriction>
<Audience>https://saml-sp.example.net</Audience> <Audience>https://saml-sp.example.net</Audience>
</AudienceRestriction> </AudienceRestriction>
</Conditions> </Conditions>
<AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.371Z"> <AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2010-10-01T20:07:34.371Z">
<AuthnContext> <AuthnContext>
<AuthnContextClassRef> <AuthnContextClassRef>
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509 urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509
</AuthnContextClassRef> </AuthnContextClassRef>
</AuthnContext> </AuthnContext>
</AuthnStatement> </AuthnStatement>
</Assertion> </Assertion>
Figure 1: Example SAML 2.0 Assertion Figure 1: Example SAML 2.0 Assertion
To present the Assertion shown in the previous example as part of an To present the Assertion shown in the previous example as part of an
access token request, for example, the client might make the access token request, for example, the client might make the
following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for display purposes following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for display purposes
only): only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: authz.example.net Host: authz.example.net
skipping to change at page 10, line 17 skipping to change at page 11, line 4
following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for display purposes following HTTPS request (with extra line breaks for display purposes
only): only):
POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 POST /token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1
Host: authz.example.net Host: authz.example.net
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2- grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Asaml2-
bearer&assertion=PEFzc2VydGlvbiBJc3N1ZUluc3RhbnQ9IjIwMTEtMDU bearer&assertion=PEFzc2VydGlvbiBJc3N1ZUluc3RhbnQ9IjIwMTEtMDU
[...omitted for brevity...]aG5TdGF0ZW1lbnQ-PC9Bc3NlcnRpb24- [...omitted for brevity...]aG5TdGF0ZW1lbnQ-PC9Bc3NlcnRpb24-
Figure 2: Example Request Figure 2: Example Request
5. Security Considerations 5. Interoperability Considerations
Agreement between system entities regarding identifiers, keys, and
endpoints is required in order to achieve interoperable deployments
of this profile. Specific items that require agreement are as
follows: values for the issuer and audience identifiers, the location
of the token endpoint, and the key used to apply and verify the
digital signature over the assertion. The exchange of such
information is explicitly out of scope for this specification and
typical deployment of it will be done alongside existing SAML Web SSO
deployments that have already established a means of exchanging such
information. Metadata for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup
Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-metadata-2.0-os] is one common
method of exchanging SAML related information about system entities.
6. Security Considerations
No additional security considerations apply beyond those described No additional security considerations apply beyond those described
within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol [RFC6749], the OAuth 2.0 within The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework [RFC6749], the Assertion
Assertion Profile [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and in the Security Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization
and Privacy Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Grants [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions], and the Security and Privacy
Language (SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os]. Considerations for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Language
(SAML) V2.0 [OASIS.saml-sec-consider-2.0-os] specifications.
6. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
6.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of 7.1. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-
urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer type:saml2-bearer
This is a request to IANA to please register the value This is a request to IANA to please register the value "grant-
"grant-type:saml2-bearer" in the registry urn:ietf:params:oauth type:saml2-bearer" in the registry urn:ietf:params:oauth established
established in An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755]. in An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755].
o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer
o Common Name: SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Grant Type Profile for o Common Name: SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Grant Type Profile for
OAuth 2.0 OAuth 2.0
o Change controller: IETF o Change controller: IETF
o Specification Document: [[this document]] o Specification Document: [[this document]]
6.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of 7.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-
urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer assertion-type:saml2-bearer
This is a request to IANA to please register the value This is a request to IANA to please register the value "client-
"client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer" in the registry assertion-type:saml2-bearer" in the registry urn:ietf:params:oauth
urn:ietf:params:oauth established in An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for established in An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755].
OAuth [RFC6755].
o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer
o Common Name: SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profile for OAuth 2.0 o Common Name: SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profile for OAuth 2.0
Client Authentication Client Authentication
o Change controller: IETF o Change controller: IETF
o Specification Document: [[this document]] o Specification Document: [[this document]]
7. References 8. References
7.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions] [I-D.ietf-oauth-assertions]
Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., Jones, M., and Y. Goland, Campbell, B., Mortimore, C., Jones, M., and Y. Goland,
"Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0", "Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0", draft-ietf-oauth-
draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-06 (work in progress), assertions-10 (work in progress), January 2013.
September 2012.
[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-
2.0-os, March 2005. core-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.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data [RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006. Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006.
[RFC6749] Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework", [RFC6749] Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework", RFC
RFC 6749, October 2012. 6749, October 2012.
[RFC6755] Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace [RFC6755] Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace
for OAuth", RFC 6755, October 2012. for OAuth", RFC 6755, October 2012.
7.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[OASIS.saml-deleg-cs] [OASIS.saml-deleg-cs]
Cantor, S., Ed., "SAML V2.0 Condition for Delegation Cantor, S., Ed., "SAML V2.0 Condition for Delegation
Restriction", Nov 2009. Restriction", Nov 2009.
[OASIS.saml-metadata-2.0-os]
Cantor, S., Moreh, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler,
"Metadata for the Security Assertion Markup Language
(SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-metadata-2.0-os, March
2005.
[OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os] [OASIS.saml-profiles-2.0-os]
Hughes, J., Cantor, S., Hodges, J., Hirsch, F., Mishra, Hughes, J., Cantor, S., Hodges, J., Hirsch, F., Mishra,
P., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Profiles for the OASIS P., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, "Profiles for the OASIS
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-
2.0-os, March 2005. consider-2.0-os, March 2005.
[W3C.REC-html401-19991224] [W3C.REC-html401-19991224]
Hors, A., Raggett, D., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01 Hors, A., Raggett, D., and I. Jacobs, "HTML 4.01
Specification", World Wide Web Consortium Specification", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation
Recommendation REC-html401-19991224, December 1999, REC-html401-19991224, December 1999,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
The following people contributed wording and concepts to this The following people contributed wording and concepts to this
document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran document: Paul Madsen, Patrick Harding, Peter Motykowski, Eran
Hammer, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten Hammer, Peter Saint-Andre, Ian Barnett, Eric Fazendin, Torsten
Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Michael B. Lodderstedt, Susan Harper, Scott Tomilson, Scott Cantor, Hannes
Jones, Hannes Tschofenig, David Waite, Phil Hunt, and Mukesh Tschofenig, David Waite, Phil Hunt, and Mukesh Bhatnagar.
Bhatnagar.
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-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-16
o Changed title from "SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Profiles for OAuth
2.0" to "SAML 2.0 Profile for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and
Authorization Grants" to be more explicit about the scope of the
document per http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/
msg11063.html.
o Fixed typo in text identifying the presenter from "or similar
element, the" to "or similar element in the".
o Numbered the list of processing rules.
o Smallish editorial cleanups to try and improve readability and
comprehensibility.
o Cleaner split out of the processing rules in cases where they
differ for client authentication and authorization grants.
o Clarified the parameters that are used/available for authorization
grants.
o Added Interoperability Considerations section and info reference
to SAML Metadata.
o Added more explanatory context to the example in Section 4.
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-15 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-15
o Reference RFC 6749 and RFC 6755. o Reference RFC 6749 and RFC 6755.
o Update draft-ietf-oauth-assertions reference to -06. o Update draft-ietf-oauth-assertions reference to -06.
o Remove extraneous word per o Remove extraneous word per http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg10055.html oauth/current/msg10055.html
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-14 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-14
o Add more text to intro explaining that an assertion grant type can o Add more text to intro explaining that an assertion grant type can
be used with or without client authentication/identification and be used with or without client authentication/identification and
that client assertion authentication is nothing more than an that client assertion authentication is nothing more than an
alternative way for a client to authenticate to the token endpoint alternative way for a client to authenticate to the token endpoint
o Add examples to Sections 2.1 and 2.2 o Add examples to Sections 2.1 and 2.2
skipping to change at page 13, line 24 skipping to change at page 15, line 5
o Changed "Description" to "Specification Document" in both o Changed "Description" to "Specification Document" in both
registration requests in IANA Considerations per changes to the registration requests in IANA Considerations per changes to the
template in ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns(-03) template in ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns(-03)
o Added "(or an acceptable alias)" so that it's in both sentences o Added "(or an acceptable alias)" so that it's in both sentences
about Recipient and the token endpoint URL so there's no ambiguity about Recipient and the token endpoint URL so there's no ambiguity
o Update area and workgroup (now Security and OAuth was Internet and o Update area and workgroup (now Security and OAuth was Internet and
nothing) nothing)
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-12
o updated reference to draft-ietf-oauth-v2 from -25 to -26 and o updated reference to draft-ietf-oauth-v2 from -25 to -26 and
draft-ietf-oauth-assertions from -02 to -03 draft-ietf-oauth-assertions from -02 to -03
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-11
o Removed text about limited lifetime access tokens and the SHOULD o Removed text about limited lifetime access tokens and the SHOULD
NOT on issuing refresh tokens. The text was moved to NOT on issuing refresh tokens. The text was moved to draft-ietf-
draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-02 and somewhat modified per oauth-assertions-02 and somewhat modified per http://www.ietf.org/
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08298.html. mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08298.html.
o Fixed typo/missing word per o Fixed typo/missing word per http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08733.html. oauth/current/msg08733.html.
o Added Terminology section. o Added Terminology section.
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-10 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-10
o fix a spelling mistake o fix a spelling mistake
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-09 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-09
o Attempt to address an ambiguity around validation requirements o Attempt to address an ambiguity around validation requirements
skipping to change at page 14, line 19 skipping to change at page 15, line 47
though it's implied by schema) though it's implied by schema)
o fix a typo o fix a typo
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-08 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-08
o fix some typos o fix some typos
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-07 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-07
o update reference from draft-campbell-oauth-urn-sub-ns to o update reference from draft-campbell-oauth-urn-sub-ns to draft-
draft-ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns ietf-oauth-urn-sub-ns
o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-20 o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-20
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-06
o Fix three typos NamseID->NameID and (2x) Namspace->Namespace o Fix three typos NamseID->NameID and (2x) Namspace->Namespace
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-05 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-05
o Allow for subject confirmation data to be optional when Conditions o Allow for subject confirmation data to be optional when Conditions
contain audience and NotOnOrAfter contain audience and NotOnOrAfter
o Rework most of the spec to profile draft-ietf-oauth-assertions for o Rework most of the spec to profile draft-ietf-oauth-assertions for
both authn and authz including (but not limited to): both authn and authz including (but not limited to):
* remove requirement for issuer to be * remove requirement for issuer to be urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:nameid-format:entity :nameid-format:entity
* change wording on Subject requirements * change wording on Subject requirements
o using a MAY, explicitly say that the Audience can be token o using a MAY, explicitly say that the Audience can be token
endpoint URL of the authorization server endpoint URL of the authorization server
o Change title to be more generic (allowing for client authn too) o Change title to be more generic (allowing for client authn too)
o added client authentication to the abstract o added client authentication to the abstract
o register and use urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer for o register and use urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer for
grant type rather than http://oauth.net/grant_type/saml/2.0/bearer grant type rather than http://oauth.net/grant_type/saml/2.0/bearer
o register urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer o register urn:ietf:params:oauth:client-assertion-type:saml2-bearer
o remove scope parameter as it is defined in o remove scope parameter as it is defined in http://tools.ietf.org/
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions html/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
o remove assertion param registration because it [should] be in o remove assertion param registration because it [should] be in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-assertions
o fix typo(s) and update/add references o fix typo(s) and update/add references
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-04 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-04
o Changed the grant_type URI from o Changed the grant_type URI from "http://oauth.net/grant_type/
"http://oauth.net/grant_type/assertion/saml/2.0/bearer" to assertion/saml/2.0/bearer" to "http://oauth.net/grant_type/saml/
"http://oauth.net/grant_type/saml/2.0/bearer" - dropping the word 2.0/bearer" - dropping the word assertion from the path. Recent
assertion from the path. Recent versions of draft-ietf-oauth-v2 versions of draft-ietf-oauth-v2 no longer refer to extension
no longer refer to extension grants using the word assertion so grants using the word assertion so this URI is more reflective of
this URI is more reflective of that. It also more closely aligns that. It also more closely aligns with the grant type URI in
with the grant type URI in draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer-00 which draft-jones-oauth-jwt-bearer-00 which is "http://oauth.net/
is "http://oauth.net/grant_type/jwt/1.0/bearer". grant_type/jwt/1.0/bearer".
o Added "case sensitive" to scope definition to align with o Added "case sensitive" to scope definition to align with draft-
draft-ietf-oauth-v2-15/16. ietf-oauth-v2-15/16.
o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-16 o Updated to reference draft-ietf-oauth-v2-16
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-03 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-03
o Cleanup of some editorial issues. o Cleanup of some editorial issues.
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-02 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-02
o Added scope parameter with text copied from draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 o Added scope parameter with text copied from draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12
(the reorg of draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 made it so scope wasn't (the reorg of draft-ietf-oauth-v2-12 made it so scope wasn't
really inherited by this spec anymore) really inherited by this spec anymore)
o Change definition of the assertion parameter to be more generally o Change definition of the assertion parameter to be more generally
applicable per the suggestion near the end of applicable per the suggestion near the end of http://www.ietf.org/
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg05253.html mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg05253.html
o Editorial changes based on feedback o Editorial changes based on feedback
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-01 draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-01
o Update spec name when referencing draft-ietf-oauth-v2 (The OAuth o Update spec name when referencing draft-ietf-oauth-v2 (The OAuth
2.0 Protocol Framework -> The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol) 2.0 Protocol Framework -> The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Protocol)
o Update wording in Introduction to talk about extension grant types o Update wording in Introduction to talk about extension grant types
rather than the assertion grant type which is a term no longer rather than the assertion grant type which is a term no longer
skipping to change at page 17, line 8 skipping to change at page 18, line 35
o Added some wording about identifying the client when the subject o Added some wording about identifying the client when the subject
hasn't directly authenticated including an informative reference hasn't directly authenticated including an informative reference
to SAML V2.0 Condition for Delegation Restriction. to SAML V2.0 Condition for Delegation Restriction.
o Added a few examples to the language about verifying that the o Added a few examples to the language about verifying that the
Assertion is valid in all other respects. Assertion is valid in all other respects.
o Added some wording to the introduction about the similarities to o Added some wording to the introduction about the similarities to
Web SSO in the format and processing rules Web SSO in the format and processing rules
o Changed the grant_type (was assertion_type) URI from o Changed the grant_type (was assertion_type) URI from http://
http://oauth.net/assertion_type/saml/2.0/bearer to oauth.net/assertion_type/saml/2.0/bearer to http://oauth.net/
http://oauth.net/grant_type/assertion/saml/2.0/bearer grant_type/assertion/saml/2.0/bearer
o Changed title to include "Grant Type" in it. o Changed title to include "Grant Type" in it.
o Editorial updates based on feedback from the WG and others o Editorial updates based on feedback from the WG and others
(including capitalization of Assertion when referring to SAML). (including capitalization of Assertion when referring to SAML).
draft-campbell-oauth-saml-00 draft-campbell-oauth-saml-00
o Initial I-D o Initial I-D
skipping to change at line 754 skipping to change at page 19, line 16
Brian Campbell Brian Campbell
Ping Identity Corp. Ping Identity Corp.
Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com Email: brian.d.campbell@gmail.com
Chuck Mortimore Chuck Mortimore
Salesforce.com Salesforce.com
Email: cmortimore@salesforce.com Email: cmortimore@salesforce.com
Michael B. Jones
Microsoft
Email: mbj@microsoft.com
URI: http://self-issued.info/
 End of changes. 64 change blocks. 
254 lines changed or deleted 343 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/