Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-31 Thread Francesco Chicchiriccò
On 31/08/2017 12:29, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: About checking the Relay State expiration, the duration is currently set to 5 seconds but I am afraid it is not curerntly verified during the response validation. 5 seconds seems a

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-31 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò < ilgro...@apache.org> wrote: > > > About checking the Relay State expiration, the duration is currently set > to 5 seconds but I am afraid it is not curerntly verified during the > response validation. > 5 seconds seems a bit unreasonable,

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-31 Thread Francesco Chicchiriccò
On 31/08/2017 11:33, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: Anyway, I see several SAML 2.0 implementations out there not enforcing the 80 chars limit: would removing all but the AuthnRequestID from the current JWT-based Relay State be an acce

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-31 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: > > Anyway, I see several SAML 2.0 implementations out there not enforcing the > 80 chars limit: would removing all but the AuthnRequestID from the current > JWT-based Relay State be an acceptable compromise? > Yeah, let's just leave

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-30 Thread Francesco Chicchiriccò
On 30/08/2017 19:01, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: Hi Francesco, On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: Hi Colm, at the moment the relay state as signed JWT is used to hold [1]: * the preference to use the (non-standard?) deflate encoding - which might be omitted, we co

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-30 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
Hi Francesco, On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: > > Hi Colm, > at the moment the relay state as signed JWT is used to hold [1]: > > * the preference to use the (non-standard?) deflate encoding - which might > be omitted, we could just take such setting from IdP confi

Re: SAML RelayState length

2017-08-17 Thread Francesco Chicchiriccò
On 15/08/2017 11:38, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: Hi all, According to the SAML 2.0 binding spec: RelayState data MAY be included with a SAML protocol message transmitted with this binding. The value MUST NOT exceed 80 bytes in length However, the relaystate we are using in Syncope, is a signed

SAML RelayState length

2017-08-15 Thread Colm O hEigeartaigh
Hi all, According to the SAML 2.0 binding spec: RelayState data MAY be included with a SAML protocol message transmitted with this binding. The value MUST NOT exceed 80 bytes in length However, the relaystate we are using in Syncope, is a signed JWT, which has length 371. Perhaps we need to reco