Thanks, John, for the clarification.  I really appreciate it.

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 6:21 AM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
> The STS always sends the RSTR to the selector.   Someone is getting confused 
> with WS-Fed passive federation.
>
> The selector always defaults to asymmetric proof keys.  The selector uses 
> ephemeral key pairs because it doesn't have a certificate as such, also to 
> protect privacy and prevent correlation.
>
> It is the selector that encrypts the token for the RP if auditing mode is not 
> used.
>
> If auditing mode is used the STS encrypts the SAML token to the RP with the 
> RP's cert.  It however will likely include a display token for the user to 
> inspect the values being returned.
>
> The selector posts the token to the RP through the browser if there is no 
> RP/STS it sends it to the RP/STS via SOAP so HoK is no problem.
>
> The as I pointed out there is a limitation on doing HoK proofs through the 
> browser.
> At the moment if the RP attempts mutual TLS to prove the browser has 
> possession of the ephemeral key the browsers are not smart enough to get the 
> Private key from the selector.
>
> That is a implementation issue.  SAML has exactly the same issue,  The 
> current HoK SAML profile requires this missing browser functionality as well. 
>    It is on the IMI-TC's issue list to address.
>
> Without HoK the ICAM profile for IMI requires auditing mode cads so that the 
> token is audience restricted and encrypted by the STS for the RP.
>
> John B.
>
> On 2009-12-16, at 1:26 AM, Travis Spencer wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:34 PM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> It is true that HoK doesn't work through a browser at the moment.
>>
>> What about when the selector is invoked because a user browses to a
>> Web page that has an info card HTML object tag in it?  When the
>> selector sends that Web site relying party the security token, is that
>> token and the HTML message signed/encrypted with a proof key by the
>> selector?  I've been told it can't be because the selector is out of
>> the picture by the time the STS sends the RSTR.  The selector requests
>> the token, but the last mile is just HTML and JavaScript.  The
>> selector (a fat client), which has the technological wherewithal to
>> sign and encrypt messages, is long gone by this point, so it can't do
>> a HoK proof and the browser can't either.  Thus, all security tokens
>> presented to Web site relying parties are bearer tokens even when info
>> card is used.  Is this correct?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Travis Spencer
>> _______________________________________________
>> higgins-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
>
>



-- 

Regards,

Travis Spencer
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev

Reply via email to