[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FEDIZ-232?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16686472#comment-16686472
 ] 

Pedro Alves commented on FEDIZ-232:
-----------------------------------

1 - Thanks for clarifying. I created FEDIZ-233 to continue the discussion.

2 - We have an IdP in between, which processes the SAML request and issues a 
WS-trust token request to the STS and places the received token into a SAML 
Response for the client. We have the request id on the IdP. My question is, how 
can we populate the SubjectConfirmationData.inResponseTo on the STS side, given 
that the SAML request id doesn't go in the WS-trust token request?

Thanks for your help

> 'wctx' parameter mandatory but protocol does not require
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FEDIZ-232
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FEDIZ-232
>             Project: CXF-Fediz
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Christian Fischer
>            Priority: Major
>
> For logins which are not initiated by a valid session on the RP side the user 
> cannot be authenticated because the wctx parameter is missing or has the 
> wrong value.
> There are at least two scenarios in which this causes a unwanted behaviour of 
> the system.
>  * First is if the IDP/login page is bookmarked and returns only later after 
> the session on the RP is timed out. 
>  * Second is something similar to a IDP initiated login flow. It's not in the 
> WS federation protocol specification but according to our tests fediz could 
> easily allow that if the 'wctx' check is removed. 
> In the protocol specification the 'wctx' parameter is also only optional, 
> where fediz expects it to be always present. There is a comment with respect 
> to CSRF prevention but our security team didn't see the case for this since 
> there is no passive way of authentication is used. In fact it's the actual 
> authentication request that is supposed to be protected, but we don't see the 
> need.
>  
> One option (if the CSRF case is valid) would be to at least disable the 
> 'wctx' state validation by setting a flag.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to