Our use-cases are pretty straightforward - customers want to perform server to 
server integration tasks without passwords.

We use the SAML and JWT assertion profiles to enable them to authenticate to 
our system without having a password for the service principal they're trying 
to act as.   Sometimes this is for security purposes ( customer doesn't want to 
use passwords ), and sometimes it's for scale purposes ( customer is building 
some sort of hub-spoke integration architecture where passwords and their 
associated distribution and maintenance simple won't scale )

While SAML is predominantly used for Web SSO today, it is used and quite 
applicable in these types of scenarios.   The easy way to picture what we're 
doing is deploying a Security Token Service similar to WS-Trust, but without 
all the baggage of WS-Trust....you can simply post Assertions to our Token 
Endpoint and we can exchange that for oauth access tokens.

-cmort


On Oct 8, 2012, at 5:05 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

Yes, OpenID Connect uses the Assertions spec and the JWT Assertion Profile.  
See uses of [OAuth.JWT] in 
http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-messages-1_0.html.   It is used for both 
client_secret_jwt and private_key_jwt client authentication.  Per 
http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC4_Solution, there are a dozen 
publicly declared OpenID Connect implementations (admittedly some incomplete), 
and substantial interop testing is under way, per 
http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/OC4:OpenID_Connect_Interop_4.

Brian Campbell and Chuck Mortimore may be able to provide similar data for use 
of the SAML Profile.

                                                                -- Mike

From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org> 
[mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 5:13 AM
To: oauth@ietf.org<mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-06


Hi all,

I took a look at version -06 of the assertions draft to see whether some of the 
discussions had been reflected in this recent draft update.

I was hoping that there is a bit more explanation of the use case that 
motivates the work. Unfortunately, the update does not contain anything along 
these lines.

For example, the use cases could clarify the following aspects:

*       Why we need these new client authentication mechanisms? This is not 
necessarily a way in which SAML is used (at least not to my knowledge). If I 
understood it correctly then the new client authentication mechanism is only 
used between the client and the authorization server but not with the resource 
server. Did I correctly read the document?

*       Then, there is the assertion usage for authorization grants. There, one 
could argue that the use case is to interwork with existing SAML 
infrastructure. The sameargument does not apply for the JSON based format since 
there is no transition need (IMHO at least).

Ciao
Hannes

PS: For the shepherd write-up I have to attach information about the 
implementation and deployment experience. Is there anything I could mention? 
Has this specification been part of the OpenID Connect interop tests? If so, 
what specifically had been tested?

_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org<mailto: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