What about temporary credentials across a local link between controlled 
systems? My point is just that there are cases where the usual leakage culprits 
(browsers, proxies, caches, logs) don't apply. 

It's also a bad idea to not use two-way TLS, and it's arguably a bad idea to 
look at anything on the web without using TLS to begin with, but we still do. 
It's all about the tradeoff between security of a system and the usability and 
usefulness of a system. There's an old adage that the most secure computer is 
powered off and unplugged. :)

I think it's very important to strike an appropriate balance.

 -- Justin
________________________________________
From: Phil Hunt [phil.h...@oracle.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 1:15 PM
To: Richer, Justin P.
Cc: William J. Mills; Lukas Rosenstock; OAuth WG
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth Bearer Token draft

-1.  It is a BAD security practice to pass credentials in URLs. Avoid it.

Phil
phil.h...@oracle.com




On 2011-03-10, at 10:07 AM, Richer, Justin P. wrote:

> Ah, here we run into the classic argument of usability vs. security, in which 
> usability will win every single time in practice. If we don't define at least 
> a reasonable way to do this within the scope of OAuth, that's not going to 
> stop people from doing it. It's just going to make people do it in a million 
> different ways, each with their own unique problems that nobody's thought of. 
> At least this way, we can enable it and have a real discussion about the 
> security considerations. There are valid and valuable places where putting 
> credentials in the URL is a reasonable security tradeoff. Not everything 
> functions over the public internet as well, and the security considerations 
> are different in these other environments.
>
> In short: yes, it's necessary and good to do this.
>
> -- Justin
> ________________________________________
> From: William J. Mills [wmi...@yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 12:59 PM
> To: Richer, Justin P.; Lukas Rosenstock
> Cc: Brian Eaton; OAuth WG
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth Bearer Token draft
>
> Yeah, but there are serious security problems with credentials in the URL, is 
> it really worth it in light of those problems?
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Richer, Justin P." <jric...@mitre.org>
> To: Lukas Rosenstock <l...@lukasrosenstock.net>; William J. Mills 
> <wmi...@yahoo-inc.com>
> Cc: Brian Eaton <bea...@google.com>; OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 9:49 AM
> Subject: RE: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth Bearer Token draft
>
> Yes, there are many development setups where all you can reasonably access is 
> the URL to get. It's also much simpler to make use of the well-supported 
> syntax helpers for query parameters instead of relying on new, custom 
> formatting for newly-defined headers. The bearer token makes this simple by 
> just having the value of the token, but other schemes have their own 
> name/value pair formats and encodings that will inevitably cause hiccups.
>
> -- Justin
> ________________________________________
> From: Lukas Rosenstock 
> [l...@lukasrosenstock.net<mailto:l...@lukasrosenstock.net>]
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 11:49 AM
> To: William J. Mills
> Cc: Brian Eaton; Richer, Justin P.; OAuth WG
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] OAuth Bearer Token draft
>
> JSON-P (callback) works with <script> tags where no parameters can be set; 
> this is used a lot in web applications that want to consume 3rd party APIs 
> directly on the client side. So, yes, an alternative for the Authorization 
> header is required - a.f.a.i.k this use case was one of the driving forces 
> behind WRAP and bearer tokens.
>
> 2011/3/9 William J. Mills 
> <wmi...@yahoo-inc.com<mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com><mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com<mailto:wmi...@yahoo-inc.com>>>
> Is there really a need going forward for anything beyond using the 
> Authorization header?  Do we have clients out there that just can't set that 
> header?  Putting bearer tokens in query arguments is a very bad idea for many 
> reasons, and in form variables has it's own set of badness (although not to 
> the same level).
>
> -bill
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to