Hello Dmitry!

AFAIK there isn’t any accepted work within OpenID Foundation defining an 
interaction between id_tokens and DPoP.  Like most of the OAuth additions which 
have come out after OpenID Connect 1.0, one could expect that it would layer on 
top transparently as something which pertains to access tokens, not id_tokens.

Similar to how OpenID Connect extends OAuth 2.0, I would expect that the use of 
confirmed id_tokens to be an extension on top of OpenID Connect (in this case, 
by Solid). I would expect that to be the most appropriate community to engage 
with.

Within the traditional OpenID Connect model, there is no reason for a client to 
share its id_token to other parties, or a sense of what sort of decisions 
another party could make if they receive an id_token which was not meant for 
them. It is not immediately apparent to me what an id_token with proof of 
possession would mean to a party which receives it, what additional 
requirements such an id_token might have, what relationship that other party 
would have a relationship with the client or OP, or how such an id_token would 
be sent.

I could see several independent efforts profiling different meanings and 
usages, which consequently would have different security considerations. In the 
absence of a proposal for a specification from OIDF, it may be better for these 
efforts to declare their own new tokens with the semantics they require rather 
than overloading id_tokens.

-DW


> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:03 PM, Dmitry Telegin 
> <dmitryt=40backbase....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Could we somehow clarify the relationship between DPoP and OIDC? (sorry if 
> this is the wrong ML)
> 
> For example, it's relatively obvious that the OIDC UserInfo should support 
> DPoP, as it is an OAuth 2.0 protected resource. What's not obvious is that 
> the WWW-Authenticate challenge (in case of 401) will most likely contain 
> multiple challenges (Bearer and DPoP), and it could be a bit tricky from the 
> browser compatibility PoV.
> 
> Another non-obvious thing is that ID tokens could be DPoP-bound as well. Some 
> technologies even rely on it, Solid-OIDC being a notable example: 
> https://solid.github.io/solid-oidc/#tokens-id 
> <https://solid.github.io/solid-oidc/#tokens-id>
> 
> Dmitry
> Backbase / Keycloak
> _______________________________________________
> 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