User-Managed Access (UMA) Core Protocol
draft-hardjono-oauth-umacore-03
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Thomas Hardjono | ||
| Last updated | 2012-02-03 (Latest revision 2011-12-13) | ||
| Stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-hardjono-oauth-umacore-03
Network Working Group T. Hardjono, Ed.
Internet-Draft MIT
Intended status: Standards Track February 3, 2012
Expires: August 6, 2012
User-Managed Access (UMA) Core Protocol
draft-hardjono-oauth-umacore-03
Abstract
This specification defines the User-Managed Access (UMA) core
protocol. This protocol provides a method for users to control
access to their protected resources, residing on any number of host
sites, through an authorization manager that governs access decisions
based on user policy.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2012.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2. Basic Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3. Endpoints, Endpoint Protection, and Tokens . . . . . . . . 7
1.4. Scopes, Resource Sets, Permissions, and Authorization . . 8
1.5. AM Configuration Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. Protecting a Resource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1. Host Looks Up AM Configuration Data . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2. Host Registers with AM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3. Host Obtains Host Access Token . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4. Host Registers Sets of Resources to Be Protected . . . . . 14
2.4.1. Scope Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4.2. Resource Set Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.3. Resource Set Registration API . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3. Getting Authorization and Accessing a Resource . . . . . . . . 22
3.1. Requester-Host: Attempt Access at Protected Resource . . . 23
3.1.1. Requester Presents No Access Token . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.1.2. Requester Presents an Invalid Access Token . . . . . . 24
3.1.3. Requester Presents a Valid Access Token . . . . . . . 24
3.2. Requester-AM: Requester Obtains Access Token . . . . . . . 25
3.3. Host-AM: Ask for Requester Access Token Status . . . . . . 26
3.4. Host-AM: Register a Permission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.5. Requester-AM: Request Authorization to Add Permission . . 30
3.6. Authorization Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.6.1. Authorization Flow for Requester Apps Operated by
End-Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4. Error Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.1. OAuth Error Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.2. UMA Error Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7. Conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
9. Example of Registering Resource Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
11. Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Appendix A. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
1. Introduction
The User-Managed Access (UMA) core protocol provides a method based
on OAuth 2.0 [OAuth2] for users to control access to their protected
resources, residing on any number of host sites, through a single
authorization manager (AM) that governs access decisions based on
user policy.
There are numerous use cases for UMA, where a resource owner elects
to have a third party to control access to these resources
potentially without the real-time presence of the resource owner. A
typical example is the following: a web user (authorizing user) can
authorize a web app (requester) to gain one-time or ongoing access to
a resource containing his home address stored at a "personal data
store" service (host), by telling the host to act on access decisions
made by his authorization decision-making service (authorization
manager or AM). The requesting party might be an e-commerce company
whose site is acting on behalf of the user himself to assist him/her
in arranging for shipping a purchased item, or it might be his friend
who is using an online address book service to collect addresses, or
it might be a survey company that uses an online service to compile
population demographics. Other scenarios and use cases for UMA usage
can be found in [UMA-usecases] and [UMA-userstories].
In enterprise settings, application access management often involves
letting back-office applications serve only as policy enforcement
points (PEPs), depending entirely on access decisions coming from a
central policy decision point (PDP) to govern the access they give to
requesters. This separation eases auditing and allows policy
administration to scale in several dimensions. UMA makes use of a
separation similar to this, letting the authorizing user serve as a
policy administrator crafting authorization strategies on his or her
own behalf.
The UMA protocol can be considered an advanced application of
[OAuth2] in that it profiles, extends, and embeds OAuth in various
ways. An AM can be thought of as an enhanced OAuth authorization
server; a host as an enhanced resource server; and a requester as an
enhanced client, acquiring an access token and the requisite
authorization to access a protected resource at the host.
The UMA protocol has three broad phases, as shown in Figure 1.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
The Three Phases of the UMA Protocol
+-----+----------------+
| UA | authorizing |
+-------Manage (A)--| | user |
| +-----+----------------+
| Phase 1: | UA |
| protect a +----------------+
| resource |
| Control (B)
| |
v v
+-----------+ +-----+----------------+
| host |<-Protect-(C)-|prot | authorization |
| | | API | manager (AM) |
+-----------+ +-----+----------------+
| protected | | authorization |
| resource | | API |
+-----------+ +----------------+
^ |
| Phases 2 and 3: Authorize (D)
| get authz and |
| access a resource v
| +----------------+
+-------Access (E)--------| requester |
+----------------+
(requesting party)
Figure 1
In broad strokes, the phases are as follows:
1. Protect a resource (described in Section 2).
2. Get authorization (described in Section 3).
3. Access a resource (described along with Phase 2 in Section 3).
In more detail, the phases work as follows:
1. _Protect a resource:_ The authorizing user has chosen to use a
host for managing online resources ("A"), and introduces this
host to an AM using an OAuth-mediated interaction that results in
the AM giving the host an access token. The host uses AM's
protection API to tell the AM what sets of resources to protect
("C"). Out of band of the UMA protocol, the authorizing user
instructs the AM what policies to attach to the registered
resource sets ("B"). Requesters are not yet in the picture.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
2. _Get authorization:_ This phase involves the requester, host, and
AM. It may also involve synchronous action by the authorizing
user if this person is the same person as the requesting party.
This phase is dominated by a loop of activity in which the
requester approaches the host seeking access to a protected
resource ("E"), is sent to obtain an access token from the AM if
it does not have one, and then must demonstrate to the AM that it
satisfies the user's authorization policy governing the sought-
for resource and scope of access if it does not already have the
required access permission ("D").
3. _Access a resource:_ This phase involves the requester
successfully presenting an access token that has sufficient
permission associated with it to the host in order to gain access
to the desired resource ("E"). In this sense, it is the "happy
path" within phase 2.
1.1. Notational Conventions
The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL NOT',
'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Unless otherwise noted, all the protocol properties and values are
case sensitive.
The assignment in this document of URI labels is temporary, awaiting
final standardization in the eventual standards body within which
this specification is taken up as a work item.
1.2. Basic Terminology
UMA introduces the following terms, utilizing OAuth and other
identity and access management concepts.
authorizing user
An UMA-defined variant of an OAuth end-user resource owner; a
web user who configures an authorization manager with policies
that control how it assigns access permissions to requesters
for a protected resource.
authorization manager (AM)
An UMA-defined variant of an OAuth authorization server that
carries out an authorizing user's policies governing access to
a protected resource.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
protected resource
An access-restricted resource at a host, which is being policy-
protected by an AM.
host
An UMA-defined variant of an OAuth resource server that
enforces access to the protected resources it hosts, as
governed by an authorization manager.
claim
A statement of the value or values of one or more identity
attributes of a requesting party. A requesting party may need
to provide claims to an authorization manager in order to
satisfy policy and gain permission for access to a protected
resource.
requester
An UMA-defined variant of an OAuth client that seeks access to
a protected resource.
requesting party
A web user, or a corporation or other legal person, that uses a
requester to seek access to a protected resource. If the
requesting party is a natural person, it may or may not be the
same person as the authorizing user.
resource set A host-managed set of one or more resources to be AM-
protected. In authorization policy terminology, a resource set
is the "object" being protected.
scope A bounded extent of access that is possible to perform on a
resource set. In authorization policy terminology, a scope is
one of the potentially many "verbs" that can logically apply to
a resource set. Whereas OAuth scopes apply to resource sets
that are implicit, UMA associates scopes with explicitly
labeled resource sets.
permission A scope of access over a particular resource set at a
particular host that is being asked for by, or being granted
to, a requester. In authorization policy terminology, a
permission is the "verb" portion of an entire policy that also
includes a "subject" (requesting party) and an "object"
(resource set).
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
1.3. Endpoints, Endpoint Protection, and Tokens
Various UMA entities present APIs for other UMA entities to use.
These APIs are as follows:
o The AM presents a _protection API_ to the host, as standardized by
this specification. This API is OAuth-protected, requiring a host
access token (issued by the AM) for successful access (see
Section 2.3 for this issuance process).
o The AM presents an _authorization API_ to the requester, as
standardized by this specification. This API is OAuth-protected,
requiring a requester access token (issued by the AM) for
successful access (see Section 3.2 for this issuance process).
o The host presents a _protected resource_ to the requester, which
can be considered -- and may in fact be -- an application-specific
or proprietary API. This API is UMA-protected, requiring a
requester access token (issued by the AM) and sufficient
permissions (also issued by the AM) for successful access (see
Section 3.5 for this latter issuance process).
The AM presents the following endpoints to the host as part of its
protection API:
host access token endpoint Part of standard OAuth, as profiled by
UMA. The endpoint at which the host asks for a host access
token on the authorizing user's behalf. (The AM may also
choose to issue a refresh token.) It will use this token to
gain access to the other protection API endpoints.
host user authorization endpoint Part of standard OAuth, as profiled
by UMA. The endpoint to which the host redirects the
authorizing user to authorize the host to use this AM for
protecting resources, if the OAuth authorization code grant
type is being used.
resource set registration endpoint The endpoint at which the host
registers resource sets it wants the AM to protect. The
operations available at this endpoint constitute a resource set
registration API that is a subset of the protection API (see
Section 2.4.3).
permission registration endpoint The endpoint at which the host
registers permissions that it anticipates a requester will
shortly be asking for from the AM.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
token status endpoint The endpoint at which the host submits
requester access tokens that have accompanied an access
request, to learn what currently valid permissions are
associated with them. This specification defines a mandatory-
to-implement token type, "artifact", which REQUIRES the host to
use this endpoint (see Section 3.3).
The AM presents the following endpoints to the requester as part of
its authorization API:
requester access token endpoint Part of standard OAuth, as profiled
by UMA. The endpoint at which the requester asks for a
requester access token. (The AM may also choose to issue a
refresh token.) It will use this token to gain access to the
other authorization API endpoint.
permission endpoint The endpoint at which the requester asks for
authorization to have a new permission associated with its
requester access token.
Finally, the host presents one or more protected resource endpoints
to the requester:
protected resource endpoint An endpoint at which a requester
attempts to access resources. This can be a singular API
endpoint, one of a set of API endpoints, a URI corresponding to
an HTML document, or any other URI. The requester needs to
present a requester access token associated with sufficient
permissions in order to gain access.
Similarly to OAuth authorization servers, an UMA AM has the
opportunity to manage the validity periods of the access tokens, the
corresponding refresh tokens, and even the client credentials that it
issues. Different lifetime strategies may be suitable for different
resources and scopes of access, and the AM has the opportunity to
give the authorizing user control through policy.
1.4. Scopes, Resource Sets, Permissions, and Authorization
UMA extends the OAuth concept of a "scope" by defining scopes as
applying to particular labeled resource sets, rather than leaving the
relevant resources (such as API endpoints or URIs) implicit. A
resource set can have any number of scopes, which together describe
the universe of actions that _can be_ taken on this protected
resource set. For example, a resource set representing a status
update API might have scopes that include adding an update or reading
updates. A resource set representing a photo album might have scopes
that include viewing a slideshow or printing the album. Hosts
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
register resource sets and their scopes when there is not yet any
requesting party or requester in the picture.
Resource sets and scopes have meaning only to hosts and their users,
in the same way that application-specific host APIs have meaning only
to these entities. The AM is merely a conveyor of labels and
descriptions for these constructs, to help the authorizing user set
policies that guide eventual authorization processes.
In contrast to an UMA scope, an UMA permission reflects an _actual_
authorization process for a requester to access a particular resource
set in a scoped (bounded) manner. Hosts register permission requests
on behalf of requesters that have attempted access. Requesters
subsequently ask AMs for (potentially multiple) permissions to be
associated with their tokens. AMs grant (or deny) permissions to
requesters.
A requester access token is bound to a single authorizing user, a
single host where protected resources controlled by that user reside,
a single AM that controls access to those resource sets, and a single
requester. Put another way, each requester access token is
associated with as many permissions as are appropriate for gaining
authorized access to that user's resources at that host, protected by
any single AM. Thus, if an authorizing user happens to protect
different resources at a host using two AMs, any requester accessing
resources on both sides of that "AM divide" would end up acquiring
two access tokens.
In order to represent meaningful, auditable, and potentially legally
enforceable authorization (see [UMA-trustmodel]), a permission is
conceptually bound to a particular set of UMA entities and parties.
This includes the requesting party, the requester (so that the same
requesting party would have to go through the authorization process
for each client application they use), the host, the resource set on
which access is being attempted, and therefore also the AM protecting
it and the authorizing user who is controlling access.
Unlike scopes (but similarly to tokens themselves; see Section 1.3),
permissions have a validity period.
1.5. AM Configuration Data
The AM MUST provide configuration data to other entities it interacts
with in aJSON [RFC4627] document that resides in an /uma-
configuration directory at at its hostmeta [RFC6415] location. The
configuration data documents major conformance options supported by
the AM (described further in Section 7) and protection and
authorization API endpoints (as described in Section 1.3).
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
The configuration data has the following properties and a Content-
Type of application/uma-configuration+json. All endpoint URIs
supplied SHOULD require the use of a transport-layer security
mechanism such as TLS.
version
REQUIRED. The version of the UMA core protocol to which this
AM conforms. The value MUST be the string "1.0".
issuer
REQUIRED. A URI indicating the party operating the AM.
dynamic_client_registration_supported
OPTIONAL. Whether dynamic client registration, such as through
[OCDynClientReg], is supported for both hosts and requesters.
The value, if this property is present, the value MUST be the
string "yes" (dynamic registration is supported, using an
unspecified method) or "no" (it is not supported; hosts and
requesters are required to pre-register). The default is AM-
specific. This property is not currently extensible. (This
conformance option is largely a placeholder for now.)
token_types_supported
REQUIRED. Access token types produced by this AM. The
property value is an array of string values. Currently the
only string value for this property defined by this
specification is "artifact", meaning an opaque token string
whose associations the host MUST determine through a token
status interaction with the AM (see Section 3.3). The AM is
REQUIRED to support the artifact token type, and to supply this
string value explicitly. The AM MAY declare its support for
additional access token types by assigning each one a unique
absolute URI in a string value in the array.
host_grant_types_supported
REQUIRED. OAuth grant types supported by this AM. The
property value is an array of string values. Each string value
MUST be one of the grant_type values defined in [OAuth2], or
alternatively an extension grant type indicated by a unique
absolute URI. The AM is REQUIRED to support the
"authorization_code" and "client_credentials" grant types, and
to supply these values explicitly. The authorization_code
grant type is primarily intended for use with hosts, and the
client_credentials grant type is primarily intended for use
with requesters.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
claim_types_supported
OPTIONAL. Claim formats and associated sub-protocols for
gathering claims from requesting parties, as supported by this
AM. The property value is an array of string values.
Currently the only string value for this property defined by
this specification is "openid", for which details are supplied
in Section 3.6.1.1. The AM MAY declare its support for
additional claim types by assigning each one a unique absolute
URI in a string value in the array.
host_token_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the host
access token endpoint URI, at which the host asks for a host
access token. Available HTTP methods are as defined by
[OAuth2] for a token endpoint.
host_user_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the host
user authorization endpoint URI, at which the host gathers the
consent of the authorizing user for a host-AM relationship if
it is using the "authorization_code" grant type. Available
HTTP methods are as defined by [OAuth2] for an end-user
authorization endpoint.
resource_set_registration_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the
resource set registration endpoint URI, at which the host
registers resource sets with the AM to put them under its
protection (see Section 2.4.3). Requests to this endpoint
require a host access token to be present.
token_status_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the token
status endpoint URI, at which the host requests the status of
access tokens presented to them by requesters (see
Section 3.3). Requests to this endpoint require a host access
token to be present.
permission_registration_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the
permission registration endpoint URI, at which the host
registers permissions with the AM for which a requester will be
seeking authorization (see Section 3.4). Requests to this
endpoint require a host access token to be present.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
requester_token_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the
requester access token endpoint URI, at which the requester
asks for an access token. Available HTTP methods are as
defined by [OAuth2] for a token issuance endpoint.
permission_request_endpoint
REQUIRED. The property value is a string conveying the
permission endpoint URI, at which the requester asks for
authorization to have a new permission associated with its
existing requester access token, which MUST accompany the
request (see Section 3.5).
The following is an example of AM configuration data that resides at
https://example.com/.well-known/uma-configuration:
Example of AM configuration data that resides at
https://example.com/.well-known/uma-configuration:
{
"version":"1.0",
"issuer":"https://example.com",
"dynamic_client_registration_supported":"yes",
"token_types_supported":[
"artifact"
],
"host_grant_types_supported":[
"authorization_code",
"client_credentials"
],
"claim_types_supported":[
"openid"
],
"host_token_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/host/token_uri",
"host_user_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/host/user_uri",
"resource_set_registration_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/host/rsrc_uri",
"token_status_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/host/status_uri",
"permission_registration_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/host/perm_uri",
"requester_token_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/requester/token_uri",
"permission_request_endpoint":"https://am.example.com/requester/perm_uri"
}
AM configuration data MAY contain extension properties that are not
defined in this specification. The names of extension properties
MUST consist of a fully qualified URL, or begin with "x-" or "X-".
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
2. Protecting a Resource
Phase 1 of UMA is protecting a resource. The user, host, and AM
perform the following steps in order to successfully complete Phase
1:
1. The host (having learned the general location of the relevant AM
out of band) looks up the AM's configuration data and learns
about its protection API endpoints and supported formats.
2. If the host has not yet obtained a unique OAuth client identifier
and optional secret from the AM, it registers with the AM as
required. It MAY do this using [OCDynClientReg], if the AM
supports it.
3. The host obtains a host access token from the AM with the
authorizing user's consent.
4. The host registers any resource sets with the AM that are
intended to be protected. (This step is repeated when and as
needed.)
If the host undertakes these actions successfully, the results are as
follows:
o The host has received configuration data about the AM, such as
endpoints it needs to use in interacting with the AM.
o The host has received an OAuth host access token that represents
this authorizing user's approval for the host to work with the AM
in protecting resources.
o The AM has acquired information about resource sets at this host
that it is supposed to protect on behalf of this authorizing user.
2.1. Host Looks Up AM Configuration Data
The host needs to learn the AM's protection API endpoints before they
can begin interacting. To get the host started in this process, the
authorizing user might provide the AM's location to it, for example,
by typing a URL into a web form field or clicking a button.
Alternatively, the host might already be configured to work with a
single AM without requiring any user input. The exact process is
beyond the scope of this specification, and it is up to the host to
choose a method to learn the AM's general location.
From the data provided, discovered, or configured, the host MUST
retrieve the AM's hostmeta document, as described in Section 2 of
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
hostmeta [RFC6415]. For example, if the user supplied "example.com"
as the Authorization Manager's domain, the host creates the URL
"https://example.com/.well-known/uma-configuration" and performs a
GET request on it. The AM MUST return content that includes UMA
protection API endpoints as defined in Section 1.5.
2.2. Host Registers with AM
If the host has not already obtained an OAuth client identifier and
optional secret from this AM, in this step it MUST do so in order to
engage in OAuth-based interactions with the AM. It MAY do this using
[OCDynClientReg], if the AM supports it (see Section 1.5 for how the
AM MAY indicate support).
2.3. Host Obtains Host Access Token
In this step, the host acquires a host access token from the AM. The
token represents the approval of the authorizing user for this host
to trust this AM for protecting resources belonging to this user.
The host MUST use OAuth 2.0 [OAuth2] to obtain the host access token.
Here the host acts in the role of an OAuth client; the authorizing
user acts in the role of an OAuth end-user resource owner; and the AM
acts in the role of an OAuth authorization server. Once the host has
obtained an access token, it presents it to the AM at various
protection API endpoints; in presenting these endpoints the AM acts
in the role of a resource server.
The AM MAY support the use of any grant type, but MUST support the
authorization_code grant type, and SHOULD support the SAML bearer
token grant type [OAuth-SAML]
(urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:saml2-bearer) if it anticipates
working with hosts that are operating in environments where the use
of SAML is prevalent. The AM MUST indicate all grant types it
supports in its configuration data, as defined in Section 1.5.
The host has completed this step successfully when it possesses a
host access token it can use at the AM's protection API.
2.4. Host Registers Sets of Resources to Be Protected
Once the host has received a host access token, for any of the user's
sets of resources that are to be protected by this AM, it MUST
register these resource sets at the AM's registration endpoint.
Note that the host is free to offer the option to protect any subset
of the user's resources using different AMs or other means entirely,
or to protect some resources and not others. Additionally, the
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
choice of protection regimes can be made explicitly by the user or
implicitly by the host. Any such partitioning by the host or user is
outside the scope of this specification.
See Section 9 for an extended example of registering resource sets.
2.4.1. Scope Descriptions
A scope is a bounded extent of access that is possible to perform on
a resource set. A scope description is a JSON document with the
following properties and a Content-Type of application/
uma-scope+json:
name REQUIRED. A human-readable string describing some scope
(extent) of access. This name is intended for ultimate use in the
AM's user interface to assist the user in setting policies for
protected resource sets that have this available scope.
icon_uri OPTIONAL. A URI for a graphic icon representing the scope.
The referenced icon is intended for ultimate use in the AM's user
interface to assist the user in setting policies for protected
resource sets that have this available scope.
For example, this description characterizes a scope that involves
reading or viewing resources (vs. creating them or editing them in
some fashion):
{
"name": "View",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/reading-glasses"
}
Scope descriptions MAY contain extension properties that are not
defined in this specification. The names of extension properties
MUST consist of a fully qualified URL, or begin with "x-" or "X-".
A host MUST list a resource set's available scopes using URI
references (as defined in Section 2.4.2). The scopes available for
use at any one host MUST have unique URI references so that the
host's scope descriptions are uniquely distinguishable. A scope URI
reference MAY include a fragment identifier. Scope descriptions MAY
reside anywhere. The host is not required to self-host scope
descriptions and may wish to point to standardized scope descriptions
residing elsewhere. Scope description documents MUST be accessible
to AMs through GET calls made to these URI references
See Section 1.4 for further discussion of scope-related concepts, and
Section 9 for a long-form example of scopes used in resource set
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
registration.
2.4.2. Resource Set Descriptions
The host defines a resource set that needs protection by registering
a resource set description at the AM. The host registers the
description and manages its lifecycle at the AM's host resource set
registration endpoint by using the resource set registration API, as
defined in Section 2.4.3.
A resource set description is a JSON document with the following
properties and a Content-Type of application/uma-resource-set+json:
name REQUIRED. A human-readable string describing a set of one or
more resources. The AM SHOULD use the name in its user interface
to assist the user in setting policies for protecting this
resource set.
icon_uri OPTIONAL. A URI for a graphic icon representing the
resource set. If provided, the AM SHOULD use the referenced icon
in its user interface to assist the user in setting policies for
protecting this resource set.
scopes REQUIRED. An array providing the URI references of scope
descriptions that are available for this resource set. The AM
SHOULD use the scope names and any icons defined as part of the
referenced scopes in its user interface to assist the user in
setting policies for protecting this resource set.
For example, this description characterizes a resource set (a photo
album) that can potentially be only viewed, or alternatively to which
full access can be granted; the URIs point to scope descriptions as
defined in Section 2.4.1:
{
"name": "Photo Album",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/flower.png",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all"
]
}
Resource set descriptions MAY contain extension properties that are
not defined in this specification. The names of extension properties
MUST consist of a fully qualified URL or begin with "x-" or "X-".
When a host creates or updates a resource set description (see
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Section 2.4.3), the AM MUST attempt to retrieve the referenced scope
descriptions. It MAY cache such descriptions as long as indicated in
the HTTP cache-control header for the scope description resource
unless the resource set description is subsequently updated within
the validity period. At the beginning of an authorizing user's login
session at the AM, the AM MUST attempt to re-retrieve scope
descriptions applying to that user whose cached versions have
expired.
2.4.3. Resource Set Registration API
The host uses the RESTful API at the AM's resource set registration
endpoint to create, read, update, and delete resource set
descriptions, along with listing groups of such descriptions. The
host MUST use its valid host access token obtained previously to gain
access to this endpoint. The resource set registration API is a
subset of the protection API.
(Note carefully the similar but distinct senses in which the word
"resource" is used in this section. UMA resource set descriptions
are themselves managed as web resources at the AM through this API.)
The AM MUST present an API for registering resource set descriptions
at a set of URIs with the structure "{rsreguri}/resource_set/{rsid}",
where the host access token provides sufficient context to
distinguish between identical resource set identifiers assigned by
different hosts.
The components of these URIs are defined as follows:
{rsreguri} The AM's resource set registration endpoint as advertised
in its configuration data (see Section 1.5).
{rsid} An identifier for a resource set description.
Without a specific resource set identifier path component, the URI
applies to the set of resource set descriptions already registered.
Following is a summary of the five registration operations the AM is
REQUIRED to support. Each is defined in its own section below. All
other methods are unsupported. This API uses ETag and If-Match to
ensure the desired resource at the AM is targeted.
o Create resource set description: PUT /resource_set/{rsid}
o Read resource set description: GET /resource_set/{rsid}
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
o Update resource set description: PUT /resource_set/{rsid} with If-
Match
o Delete resource set description: DELETE /resource_set/{rsid}
o List resource set descriptions: GET /resource_set/ with If-Match
If the request to the resource set registration endpoint is
incorrect, then the AM responds with an error message (see
Section 4.2) by including one of the following error codes with the
response:
unsupported_method_type The host request used an unsupported HTTP
method. The AM MUST respond with the HTTP 405 (Method Not
Allowed) status code and MUST fail to act on the request.
not_found The resource set requested from the AM cannot be found.
The AM MUST respond with HTTP 404 (Not Found) status code.
precondition_failed The resource set that was requested to be
deleted or updated at the AM did not match the If-Match value
present in the request. The AM MUST respond with HTTP 412
(Precondition Failed) status code and MUST fail to act on the
request.
2.4.3.1. Create Resource Set Description
Adds a new resource set description using the PUT method, thereby
putting it under the AM's protection. If the request is successful,
the AM MUST respond with a status message that includes an ETag
header and _id and _rev properties for managing resource set
description versioning.
The host is free to use its own methods of identifying and describing
resource sets. The AM MUST treat them as opaque for the purpose of
authorizing access, other than associating them with the authorizing
user represented by the host access token used to access the API. On
successfully registering a resource set, the host MUST use UMA
mechanisms to limit access to any resources corresponding to this
resource set, relying on the AM to supply currently valid permissions
for authorized access.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Form of a "create resource set description" HTTP request:
PUT /resource_set/{rsid} HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/uma-resource-set+json
...
(body contains JSON resource set description to be created)
Form of a successful HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
ETag: (matches "_rev" property in returned object)
...
{
"status": "created",
"_id": (id of created resource set),
"_rev": (ETag of created resource set)
}
On successful registration, the AM MAY return a redirect policy URI
to the host in a property with the name "policy_uri". This URI
allows the host to redirect the user to a specific user interface
within the AM where the user can immediately set or modify access
policies for the resource set that was just registered.
Form of a successful HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
ETag: (matches "_rev" property in returned object)
...
{
"status": "created",
"_id": (id of created resource set),
"_rev": (ETag of created resource set)
"policy_uri":"http://am.example.com/host/222/resource/333/policy"
}
2.4.3.2. Read Resource Set Description
Reads a previously registered resource set description using the GET
method. If the request is successful, the AM MUST respond with a
status message that includes an ETag header and _id and _rev
properties for managing resource set description versioning.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Form of a "read resource set description" HTTP request:
GET /resource_set/{rsid} HTTP/1.1
...
Form of a successful HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/uma-resource-set+json
...
(body contains JSON resource set description, including _id and _rev)
If the referenced resource does not exist, the AM MUST produce an
error response with an error property value of "not_found", as
defined in Section 2.4.3.
On successful read, the AM MAY return a redirect policy URI to the
host in a property with the name "policy_uri". This URI allows the
host to redirect the user to a specific user interface within the AM
where the user can immediately set or modify access policies for the
resource set that was read.
2.4.3.3. Update Resource Set Description
Updates a previously registered resource set description using the
PUT method, thereby changing the resource set's protection
characteristics. If the request is successful, the AM MUST respond
with a status message that includes an ETag header and _id and _rev
properties for managing resource set description versioning.
Form of an "update resource set description" HTTP request:
PUT /resource_set/{rsid} HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/resource-set+json
If-Match: (entity tag of resource)
...
(body contains JSON resource set description to be updated)
Form of a successful HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 204 No Content
ETag: "2"
...
If the entity tag does not match, the AM MUST produce an error
response with an error property value of "precondition_failed", as
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
defined in Section 2.4.3.
On successful update, the AM MAY return a redirect policy URI to the
host in a property with the name "policy_uri". This URI allows the
host to redirect the user to a specific user interface within the AM
where the user can immediately set or modify access policies for the
resource set that was just updated.
2.4.3.4. Delete Resource Set Description
Deletes a previously registered resource set description using the
DELETE method, thereby removing it from the AM's protection regime.
Form of a "delete resource set description" HTTP request:
DELETE /resource_set/{rsid}
If-Match: (entity tag of resource)
...
Form of a successful HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 204 No content
...
As defined in Section 2.4.3, if the referenced resource does not
exist the AM MUST produce an error response with an error property
value of "not_found", and if the entity tag does not match the AM
MUST produce an error response with an error property value of
"precondition_failed".
2.4.3.5. List Resource Set Descriptions
Lists all previously registered resource set identifiers for this
user using the GET method. The AM MUST return the list in the form
of a JSON array of {rsid} values.
The host uses this method as a first step in checking whether its
understanding of protected resources is in full synchronization with
the AM's understanding.
Form of a "list resource set descriptions" HTTP request:
GET /resource_set HTTP/1.1
...
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
HTTP response:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/json
...
(body contains JSON array of {rsid} values)
3. Getting Authorization and Accessing a Resource
Phase 2 of UMA is getting authorization, and Phase 3 is accessing a
resource. In these phases, an AM orchestrates and controls
requesting parties' access to a user's protected resources at a host,
under conditions dictated by that user.
Phase 3 is merely the successful completion of a requester's access
attempt (see Section 3.1.3.2) that initially involved several
embedded interactions among the requester, AM, and host in Phase 2.
Phase 2 always begins with the requester attempting access at a
protected resource endpoint at the host. How the requester came to
learn about this endpoint is out of scope for UMA. The authorizing
user might, for example, have advertised its availability publicly on
a blog or other website, listed it in a discovery service, or emailed
a link to a particular intended requesting party.
The host responds to the requester's access request in one of several
ways depending on the circumstances of the request, either
immediately or having first performed one or more embedded
interactions with the AM. Depending on the nature of the host's
response to an failed access attempt, the requester itself engages in
embedded interactions with the AM before re-attempting access.
The interactions are as follows. The interaction summarized in each
top-level list item MAY be the last interaction engaged in, if the
requester chooses not to continue pursuing the access attempt, or the
host chooses not to continue facilitating it.
o The requester attempts access at a particular protected resource
at a host (see Section 3.1).
* If the access attempt is unaccompanied by a requester access
token, the host responds immediately with an HTTP 401
(Unauthorized) response and instructions on where to go to
obtain one (see Section 3.1.1).
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
o If the access attempt was accompanied by a requester access token,
the host checks the token's status (see Section 3.3).
* If the requester access token is invalid (see Section 3.1.2),
the host responds to the requester with an HTTP 401
(Unauthorized) response and instructions on where to go to
obtain a token (see Section 3.1.1).
o If the requester access token is valid (see Section 3.1.3) but
none of the permissions associated with the token match the scope
of attempted access, the host registers a suitable permission on
the requester's behalf at the AM (see Section 3.4) and then
responds to the requester with an HTTP 403 (Forbidden) response
and instructions on where to go to request authorization to
associate that permission with its token (see Section 3.1.3.1).
o If the requester received instructions on where to get a token, it
requests a token from the appropriate AM (see Section 3.2).
o If the requester received instructions on where to get
authorization for adding a permission, it requests the permission
from the appropriate AM (see Section 3.5).
* If the requester asked the AM to add a permission, the AM
engages in an authorization flow that MAY require requesting
claims from the requesting party (see Section 3.6).
o If the requester access token is valid, and at least one of the
permissions associated with the token match the scope of attempted
access, the host responds to the requester's access attempt with
an HTTP 200 (OK) response and a representation of the resource
(see Section 3.1.3.2).
The interactions are described in detail in the following sections.
3.1. Requester-Host: Attempt Access at Protected Resource
This interaction assumes that the host has previously registered with
an AM one or more resource sets that correspond to the resource to
which access is being attempted, such that the host considers this
resource to be UMA-protected by a particular AM.
The requester typically attempts to access the desired resource at
the host directly (for example, when a human operator of the
requester software clicks on a thumbnail representation of the
resource). The requester is expected to discover, or be provisioned
or configured with, knowledge of the protected resource and its
location out of band. Further, the requester is expected to acquire
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
its own knowledge about the application-specific methods made
available by the host for operating on this protected resource (such
as viewing it with a GET method, or transforming it with some complex
API call) and the possible scopes of access.
The host responds in one of the following ways.
3.1.1. Requester Presents No Access Token
If the requester does not present any access token with the request,
the host MUST return an HTTP 401 (Unauthorized) status code, along
with providing the AM's URI to facilitate AM configuration data
discovery by the requester.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
WWW-Authenticate: UMA realm="example",
host_id="photoz.example.com",
am_uri="http://am.example.com"
...
3.1.2. Requester Presents an Invalid Access Token
If the requester presents an access token with its request, and the
token is invalid (see Section 3.3), the host MUST return an HTTP 401
(Unauthorized) status code, along with providing the AM's URI to
facilitate AM configuration data discovery by the requester.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
WWW-Authenticate: UMA realm="example",
host_id="photoz.example.com",
am_uri="http://am.example.com"
...
3.1.3. Requester Presents a Valid Access Token
If the requester presents an access token with its request, and the
token is valid (see Section 3.3), the host examines the token status
description.
3.1.3.1. Requester's Token Has Insufficient Permission
If the token status is not associated with any currently valid
permission that applies to the scope of access attempted by the
requester, the Host SHOULD register a permission with the AM (see
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Section 3.4) that would suffice for that scope of access, and then
respond to the requester with the HTTP 403 (Forbidden) status code,
along with providing the AM's URI in the header of the message and
the permission ticket it just received from the AM in the body of the
JSON form.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden
WWW-Authenticate: UMA realm="example",
host_id="photoz.example.com",
am_uri="http://am.example.com"
{
"ticket": "016f84e8-f9b9-11e0-bd6f-0021cc6004de"
}
3.1.3.2. Requester's Token Has Sufficient Permission
If the token status is associated with at least one currently valid
permission that applies to the scope of access attempted by the
requester, the host MUST give access to the desired resource.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: image/jpeg
...
/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgAAZABkAAD/7AARRHVja
3kAAQAEAAAAPAAA/+4ADkFkb2JlAGTAAAAAAf
/bAIQABgQEBAUEBgUFBgkGBQYJCwgGBggLDAo
KCwoKDBAMDAwMDAwQDA4PEA8ODBMTFBQTExwb
This response constitutes the conclusion of Phase 3 of UMA.
The host MUST NOT give access where the token's status is not
associated with at least one currently active permission hat suffices
for that scope of access.
3.2. Requester-AM: Requester Obtains Access Token
When a requester does not possess a valid access token for accessing
resources of a particular user at a particular host, it requests one
from the AM's requester token endpoint.
The requester learns about this endpoint by retrieving the AM's
hostmeta document based on the "am_uri" information that was provided
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
by the host in its previous response, as described in Section 2 of
hostmeta [RFC6415]. For example, if the "am_uri" is
"am.example.com", the requester creates the URI
"https://example.com/.well-known/uma-configuration" and performs a
GET request on it.
As discussed in Section 1.4, a requester access token represents, at
any one time, the set of permissions for that requesting party to
access potentially many different resource sets (all controlled by a
single authorizing user), with an applicable set of scopes, at that
same host.
The requester SHOULD use the OAuth client_credentials authorization
grant type (see Section 4.4 of [OAuth2]). If the requester does not
yet have a client identifier and optional client secret prior to
requesting an access token, it MAY request these using
[OCDynClientReg], if the AM supports it (see Section 1.5 for how the
AM MAY indicate support).
(Note that in UMA, unlike in plain OAuth, obtaining an access token
does not automatically convey permission for access to any protected
resource. The token must first be associated with at least one
suitable permission for scoped access in order for the requester to
succeed in accessing the resource.)
3.3. Host-AM: Ask for Requester Access Token Status
In this specification, the only access token type that is mandatory
to implement is "artifact" (see Section 1.5). On receiving a
requester access token of this type in an access attempt, the host
MUST ask the AM for that token's status. If it has a cached token
status description available that has not expired yet, it MAY use it
instead. Profiles defining alternate token types MAY require, allow,
or prohibit the token status request-response interaction as
appropriate.
In order to request the AM for a token's status, the host makes the
request to the AM with a POST request to the AM's token status
endpoint. The body of the HTTP request message contains a JSON
document providing the requester access token and the IP address of
the requester's request. The host MAY, at its discretion, instead
supply the originating IP address indicated in the requester's
X-Forwarded-For: header value. The IP address or originating IP
address is advisory only; the AM MAY ignore it for purposes of its
own token validation process.
The host gains access to the token status endpoint by presenting its
own host access token in the request.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Note that although the host's request is a safe operation, which
normally would use the GET operation, this specification dictates the
use of POST because it is advantageous for security in cases where
the requester access token is a bearer token. Since the host
provides its own host access token in the authorization header of the
request, the requester's access token appears in the request body. A
GET operation would expose the message to being recorded in AM access
logs. The "artifact" token type, which is mandatory for AMs to
implement, is a type of bearer token.
Example of a request to the token validation endpoint that provides
the host access token in the header:
POST /token_status HTTP/1.1
Host: am.example.com
Authorization: Bearer vF9dft4qmT
Content-Type: application/json
...
{
"token": "sbjsbhs(/SSJHBSUSSJHVhjsgvhsgvshgsv",
"resource_set_id": "112210f47de98100",
"host_id": "photoz.example.com",
"ipaddr": "192.168.1.1"
}
The AM returns the token's status in an HTTP response using the 200
OK status code, containing a JSON document supplying the token status
description. The token status description either contains all of the
permissions that are currently valid for this requester access token
at the host in question (and thus for the requesting party on whose
behalf it is acting), or indicates that the token is invalid (see
Section 1.4). The AM MAY set a cache period for the returned token
status description that allows the host to reuse it over some period
of time when it later sees the same requester access token.
The token status description for a valid access token is a JSON array
of zero or more permission objects, each with the following
properties:
resource_set_id REQUIRED. A string that uniquely identifies the
resource set, access to which has been granted to this requester
on behalf of this requesting party. The identifier MUST
correspond to a resource set that was previously registered as
protected.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
scopes REQUIRED. An array referencing one or more URIs of scopes to
which access was granted for this resource set. Each scope MUST
correspond to a scope that was registered by this host for the
referenced resource set.
exp REQUIRED. An integer representing the expiration time on or
after which the permission MUST NOT be accepted for authorized
access. The processing of the exp property requires that the
current date/time MUST be before the expiration date/time listed
in the exp claim. Host implementers MAY provide for some small
leeway, usually no more than a few minutes, to account for clock
skew.
Example:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/uma-token-status+json
Cache-Control: no-store
...
[
{
"resource_set_id": "112210f47de98100",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/actions/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/actions/all"
],
"exp": 1300819380
}
]
The token status description for an invalid access token is a JSON
structure, as follows.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/uma-token-status+json
...
{
"token_status": "invalid"
}
3.4. Host-AM: Register a Permission
If the permissions returned by the AM from a token status request are
insufficient to allow this requester's access attempt, the host
SHOULD register a permission with the AM that it believes would be
sufficient for the type of access sought. As a result of the host
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
registering a permission to the AM, the AM returns a permission
ticket for the host to give to the requester in its response (see
Section 3.1.3.1).
The permission ticket is a short-lived opaque structure whose form is
determined by the AM. The ticket value MUST be securely random (for
example, not merely part of a predictable sequential series), to
avoid denial-of-service attacks. Since the ticket is an opaque
structure from the point of view of the requester, the AM is free to
include information regarding expiration time within the opaque
ticket for its own consumption.
Later, when the requester asks the AM to add permissions to the
requester's token (see Section 3.5 it will submit this ticket to the
AM. It is therefore the task of the AM to perform binding of this
ticket to the requester and its token.
The host registers the permission using the POST method at the AM's
permission registration endpoint, providing its host access token to
get authorized access to this endpoint. The body of the HTTP request
message contains a JSON document providing the requester's access
token and the requested permission.
The requested scope is an object with the name "requested_permission"
and the following properties:
resource_set_id REQUIRED. A string that uniquely identifies a
resource set, access to which this requester is seeking access.
The identifier MUST correspond to a resource set that was
previously registered as protected.
scopes REQUIRED. An array referencing one or more identifiers of
scopes to which access is needed for this resource set. Each
scope identifier MUST correspond to a scope that was registered by
this host for the referenced resource set.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Example of an HTTP request that registers a permission at the AM's
permission registration endpoint:
POST /host/scope_reg_uri/photoz.example.com HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/uma-requested-permission+json
Host: am.example.com
{
"resource_set_id": "112210f47de98100",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/actions/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/actions/all"
]
}
If the registration request is successful, the AM responds with an
HTTP 201 (Created) status code and includes the Location header in
its response as well as the "ticket" property in the JSON-formatted
body.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-permission-ticket+json
Location: https://am.example.com/permreg/host/photoz.example.com/5454345rdsaa4543
...
{
"ticket": "016f84e8-f9b9-11e0-bd6f-0021cc6004de"
}
If the registration request is authenticated properly but fails due
to other reasons, the AM responds with an HTTP 400 (Bad Request)
status code and includes one of the following UMA error codes (see
Section 4.2):
invalid_resource_set_id The provided resource set identifier was not
found at the AM.
invalid_scope At least one of the scopes included in the request was
not registered previously by this host.
3.5. Requester-AM: Request Authorization to Add Permission
In this interaction, the requester asks the AM to grant it permission
for access. It does this at the AM's permission endpoint by
supplying the permission ticket it got from the host, along with its
requester access token and other pertinent information. The AM uses
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
the ticket to look up the previously registered permission, maps the
requested permission to operative user policies, undergoes any
authorization flows required (see Section 3.6), and ultimately
responds to the request positively or negatively.
The requester learns about this endpoint by retrieving the AM's
hostmeta document (see Section 1.5) based on the "am_uri" information
that was provided by the host in its previous response, as described
in Section 2 of hostmeta [RFC6415]. For example, if the "am_uri" is
"example.com", the requester creates the URI
"https://example.com/.well-known/uma-configuration" and performs a
GET request on it.
The requester performs a GET or POST on the permission endpoint,
supplying:
o The permission ticket it received from the host
o Its own requester access token
o A state property (to help avoid replay attacks)
o A redirect URL
o A callback URL
The AM MUST support GET requests to this endpoint and MAY support
POST requests; if it supports POST, the endpoint MUST use SSL/TLS.
(Requesters will tend to prefer POST when they want to sign the
request message and preserve certain URL information; however, GET
typically provides a smoother user experience.)
If the AM determines that the requesting party meets the
authorization criteria set out by the authorizing user's policy (see
Section 3.6), it responds with an HTTP 201 (Created) status code and
provides an updated token:
For example:
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-access-token+json
{
"token": "sbjsbhs(/SSJHBSUSSJHVhjsgvhsgvshgsv"
}
If the content-type of the request is not recognized by the AM, the
AM MUST produce an HTTP error.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
If the request fails due to missing or invalid parameters, or is
otherwise malformed, the AM SHOULD inform the requester of the error
by sending an HTTP error response.
If the request fails due to an invalid, missing, or expired requester
access token or requires higher privileges at this endpoint than
provided by the access token, the AM responds with an OAuth error
(see Section 4.1).
For example:
HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
WWW-Authenticate: Bearer realm="example",
error="invalid_token",
error_description="The access token expired"
If the AM ultimately does not add the requested permission, it
responds using the appropriate HTTP status code (typically 400 or
403), and includes one of the following error codes in the response
(see Section 4.2):
invalid_requester_ticket The provided ticket was not found at the
AM. The AM SHOULD respond with the HTTP 400 (Bad Request) status
code.
expired_requester_ticket The provided ticket has expired. The AM
SHOULD respond with the HTTP 400 (Bad Request) status code.
not_authorized_permission The requester is definitively not
authorized for this permission according to user policy. The AM
SHOULD respond with the HTTP 403 (Forbidden) status code.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
Cache-Control: no-store
...
{
"status": "error",
"error": "expired_requester_ticket"
}
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
3.6. Authorization Flows
The AM MUST base its decisions to add permissions to requester access
tokens on user policies. The nature of these policies is outside the
scope of UMA, but generally speaking, they can be thought of as
either independent of requesting-party features (for example, time of
day) or dependent on requesting-party features (for example, whether
they are over 18). This latter case requires the requesting party to
transmit identity claims to the AM in some fashion.
The process for requesting and providing claims is extensible and may
have a variety of dependencies on the type of requesting party (for
example, natural person or legal person) and the type of requester
application (for example, browser, native app, or autonomously
running web service). UMA currently provides a framework for
handling human-driven requester apps and an optional solution for
gathering standardized claims from that end-user, and allows for
extensions to support other solutions for this use case and other use
cases. The AM SHOULD document its claims-handling ability in its XRD
configuration data through the claim_types_supported property (see
Section 1.5). For the business-level and legal implications of
different technical authorization flows, see [UMA-trustmodel].
3.6.1. Authorization Flow for Requester Apps Operated by End-Users
A requester app, whether browser-based or native, is operated by a
natural person (human end-user) in one of two typical situations:
o The requesting party is a natural person (for example, a friend of
the authorizing user); the requesting party may even be the
authorizing user herself.
o The requesting party is a legal person such as a corporation, and
the human being operating the requester app is acting as an agent
of that legal person (for example, a customer support specialist
representing a credit card company).
The AM has a variety of options at this point for satisfying the
authorizing user's policy; this specification does not dictate a
single answer. For example, the AM could require the end-user
operating the requester app to register for and/or log in to a local
AM account, or to fill in a questionnaire, or to complete a purchase.
It could even require several of these operations, where the order is
significant.
An end-user-driven requester app MUST redirect the end-user to the AM
to complete the process of authorization. If the AM succeeds in
adding the requested permission, it MUST redirect the end-user
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
requesting party back to the requester app when reporting success.
3.6.1.1. Gathering Claims from Requesting End-Users with OpenID Connect
An AM MAY use OpenID Connect as one means of gathering claims from an
end-user requesting party, leveraging OpenID Connect mechanisms to
transmit claims from distributed sources. If it supports this
option, the AM MUST supply the "openid" value for one of its
claim_types_supported values in its AM configuration data (see
Section 1.5 for how to formulate this data).
To conform to this option, the AM MUST do the following:
o Serve as a conforming OpenID Relying Party and Claims Client
according to [OCStandard]
o Be able to utilize at least all of the reserved claims defined in
[OCMessages] in assessing policy and granting permissions
The AM can then use any conforming OpenID Connect mechanisms and
typical user interfaces for engaging with the UserInfo endpoints of
OpenID Providers and Claims Providers, potentially allowing for the
delivery of "trusted claims" (such as a verified email address or a
date or birth) on which authorization policy may depend.
4. Error Messages
Ultimately the host is responsible for either granting the access the
requester attempted, or returning an error response to the requester
with a reason for the failure. [OAuth2] defines several error
responses for a resource server to return. UMA makes use of these
error responses, but requires the host to "outsource" the
determination of some error conditions to the AM. UMA defines its
own additional error responses that the AM may give to the host and
requester as they interact with it, and that the host may give to the
requester.
4.1. OAuth Error Responses
When a client (host or requester) attempts to access one of the AM
endpoints Section 1.5 or a client (requester) attempts to access a
protected resource at the host, it has to make an authenticated
request by including an OAuth access token in the HTTP request as
described in [OAuth2] Section 7.
If the client's request failed authentication, the AM or the host
responds with an OAuth error message as described throughout
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Section 2 and Section 3.
4.2. UMA Error Responses
When a client (host or requester) attempts to access one of the AM
endpoints Section 1.5 or a client (requester) attempts to access a
protected resource at the host, if the client request is successfully
authenticated by OAuth means, but is invalid for another reason, the
AM or host responds with an UMA error response by adding the
following properties to the entity body of the HTTP response using
the "application/json" media type:
error REQUIRED. A single error code. Value for this property is
defined in the specific AM endpoint description.
error_description OPTIONAL. A human-readable text providing
additional information, used to assist in the understanding and
resolution of the error occurred.
error_uri OPTIONAL. A URI identifying a human-readable web page
with information about the error, used to provide the end-user
with additional information about the error.
Common error codes:
invalid_request The request is missing a required parameter or is
otherwise malformed. The AM MUST respond with the HTTP 400 (Bad
Request) status code.
For example:
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
Cache-Control: no-store
...
{
"status": "error",
"error": "invalid_request",
"error_description": "There is already a resource with this identifier.",
"error_uri": "http://am.example.com/errors/resource_exists"
}
5. Security Considerations
This specification relies mainly on OAuth security mechanisms for
protecting the host registration endpoint at the AM so that only a
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
properly authorized host can access it on behalf of the intended
user. For example, the host needs to use a valid host access token
issued through a user authorization process at the endpoint, and the
interaction SHOULD take place over TLS. It is expected that the host
will protect its client secret (if it was issued one) and its host
access token, particularly if used in "bearer token" fashion.
In addition, this specification dictates a binding between the host
access token and the host-specific registration area on the AM to
prevent a host from interacting with a registration area not its own.
This specification defines a number of JSON-based data formats. As a
subset of the JavaScript scripting language, JSON data SHOULD be
consumed through a process that does not dynamically execute it as
code, to avoid malicious code execution. One way to achieve this is
to use a JavaScript interpreter rather than the built-in JavaScript
eval() function.
For information about the technical, operational, and legal elements
of trust establishment between UMA entities and parties, which
affects security considerations, see [UMA-trustmodel].
6. Privacy Considerations
The AM comes to be in possession of resource set information (such as
names and icons) that may reveal information about the user, which
the AM's trust relationship with the host is assumed to accommodate.
However, the requester is a less-trusted party (in fact, entirely
untrustworthy until it acquires permissions for a requester access
token in UMA protocol step 2). This specification recommends
obscuring resource set identifiers in order to avoid leaking
personally identifiable information to requesters through the "scope"
mechanism.
For information about the technical, operational, and legal elements
of trust establishment between UMA entities and parties, which
affects privacy considerations, see [UMA-trustmodel].
7. Conformance
This section outlines conformance requirements for various entities
implementing UMA endpoints.
This specification has dependencies on other specifications, as
follows:
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
o OAuth 2.0: AMs, hosts, and requesters MUST support [OAuth2]
features named in this specification for conformance. For
example, AMs MUST support the authorization_code and
client_credentials grant types.
o hostmeta: AMs, hosts, and requesters MUST support the [RFC6415]
features named in this specification.
o OpenID Connect: AMs MAY support [OCDynClientReg], and MAY choose
to conform to the "openid" claim format option, corresponding to
the OpenID Connect RP role defined in [OCStandard] and support for
OpenID Connect reserved claims defined in [OCMessages].
The AM's configuration data provides a machine-readable method for an
AM to indicate certain of the conformance options it has chosen.
Several of the data properties allow for extensibility. Where this
specification does not already require optional features to be
documented, it is RECOMMENDED that AM developers and deployers
document any profiled or extended features explicitly and use
configuration data to indicate their usage. See Section 1.5 for
information about providing and extending AM configuration data.
8. IANA Considerations
Several UMA-specific JSON-based media types are being proposed, as
follows: (TBS)
9. Example of Registering Resource Sets
The following example illustrates the intent and usage of resource
set descriptions and scope descriptions as part of resource set
registration.
This example contains some steps that are exclusively in the realm of
user experience rather than web protocol, to achieve realistic
illustration. These steps are labeled "User experience only". Some
other steps are exclusively internal to the operation of the entity
being discussed. These are labeled "Internal only".
An authorizing user, Alice Adams, has just uploaded a photo of her
new puppy to a host, Photoz.example.com, and wants to ensure that
this specific photo is not publicly accessible.
Alice has already introduced this host to her AM,
CopMonkey.example.com, and thus Photoz has already obtained a host
access token from CopMonkey. However, Alice has not previously
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
instructed Photoz to use CopMonkey to protect any other photos of
hers.
Alice has previously visited CopMonkey to map a default "do not share
with anyone" policy to any resource sets registered by Photoz, until
such time as she maps some other more permissive policies to those
resources. (User experience only. This may have been done at the
time Alice introduced the host to the AM, and/or it could have been a
global or host-specific preference setting. A different constraint
or no constraint at all might be associated with newly protected
resources.) Other kinds of policies she may eventually map to
particular photos or albums might be "Share only with
husband@email.example.net" or "Share only with people in my 'family'
group".
Photoz itself has a publicly documented application-specific API that
offers two dozen different methods that apply to single photos, such
as "addTags" and "getSizes", but rolls them up into two photo-related
scopes of access: "view" (consisting of various read-only operations)
and "all" (consisting of various reading, editing, and printing
operations). It defines two scope descriptions that represent these
scopes, which it is able to reuse for all of its users (not just
Alice), and ensures that these scope description documents are
available through HTTP GET requests that may be made by AMs.
The "name" property values are intended to be seen by Alice when she
maps authorization constraints to specific resource sets and actions
while visiting CopMonkey, such that Alice would see the strings "View
Photo and Related Info" and "All Actions", likely accompanied by the
referenced icons, in the CopMonkey interface. (Other users of Photoz
might similarly see the same labels at CopMonkey or whatever other AM
they use. Photoz could distinguish natural-language labels per user
if it wishes, by pointing to scopes with differently translated
names.)
Example of the viewing-related scope description document available
at http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view with a Content-Type of
application/uma-scope+json:
{
"name": "View Photo and Related Info",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/reading-glasses.png"
}
Example of the broader scope description document available at
http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all, likewise with a Content-
Type of application/uma-scope+json:
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
{
"name": "All Actions",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/galaxy.png"
}
While visiting Photoz, Alice selects a link or button that instructs
the site to "Protect" or "Share" this single photo (user experience
only; Photoz could have made this a default or preference setting).
As a result, Photoz defines for itself a resource set that represents
this photo (internal only; Photoz is the only application that knows
how to map a particular photo to a particular resource set). Photoz
also prepares the following resource set description, which is
specific to Alice and her photo. The "name" property value is
intended to be seen by Alice in mapping authorization policies to
specific resource sets and actions when she visits CopMonkey. Alice
would see the string "Steve the puppy!", likely accompanied by the
referenced icon, in the CopMonkey interface. The possible scopes of
access on this resource set are indicated with URI references to the
scope descriptions, as shown just above.
{
"name": "Steve the puppy!",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/flower",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all"
]
}
Photoz uses the "create resource set description" method of
CopMonkey's standard UMA resource set registration API, presenting
its Alice-specific host access token there, to register and assign an
identifier to the resource set description.
PUT /resource_set/112210f47de98100 HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/uma-resource-set+json
...
{
"name": "Steve the puppy!",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/flower.png",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all"
]
}
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
If the registration attempt succeeds, CopMonkey responds in the
following fashion.
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
ETag: "1"
...
{
"status": "created",
"_id": "112210f47de98100",
"_rev": "1"
}
At the time Alice indicates she would like this photo protected,
Photoz can choose to redirect Alice to CopMonkey for further policy
setting, access auditing, and other AM-related tasks (user experience
only).
Once it has successfully registered this description, Photoz is
responsible for outsourcing to CopMonkey all questions of
authorization for access attempts made to this photo.
Over time, as Alice uploads other photos and creates and organizes
photo albums, and as Photoz makes new action functionality available,
Photoz can use additional methods of the resource set registration
API to ensure that CopMonkey's understanding of Alice's protected
resources matches its own.
For example, if Photoz suspects that somehow its understanding of the
resource set has gotten out of sync with CopMonkey's, it can ask to
read the resource set description as follows.
GET /resource_set/112210f47de98100 HTTP/1.1
Host: am.example.com
...
CopMonkey responds with the full content of the resource set
description, including its _id and its current _rev, as follows:
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Example of an HTTP response to a "read resource set description"
request, containing a resource set description from the AM:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/uma-resource-set+json
ETag: "1"
...
{
"_id": "112210f47de98100",
"_rev": "1",
"name": "Photo album",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/flower.png",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all"
]
}
If for some reason Photoz and CopMonkey have gotten dramatically out
of sync, Photoz can ask for the list of resource set identifiers
CopMonkey currently knows about:
GET /resource_set HTTP/1.1
Host: am.example.com
...
CopMonkey's response might look as follows:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/json
...
[ "112210f47de98100", "34234df47eL95300" ]
If Alice later changes the photo's title (user experience only) on
Photoz from "Steve the puppy!" to "Steve on October 14, 2011", Photoz
would use the "update resource set description" method to ensure that
Alice's experience of policy-setting at CopMonkey remains consistent
with what she sees at Photoz. Following is an example of this
request.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
PUT /resource_set/112210f47de98100 HTTP/1.1
Content-Type: application/uma-resource-set+json
Host: am.example.com
If-Match: "1"
...
{
"name": "Steve on October 14, 2011",
"icon_uri": "http://www.example.com/icons/flower.png",
"scopes": [
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/view",
"http://photoz.example.com/dev/scopes/all"
]
}
CopMonkey would respond as follows.
HTTP/1.1 201 Created
Content-Type: application/uma-status+json
ETag: "2"
...
{
"status": "updated",
"_id": "112210f47de98100",
"_rev": "2"
}
There are other reasons Photoz might want to update resource set
descriptions, having nothing to do with Alice's actions or wishes.
For example, it might extend its API to include new features, and
want to add new scopes to all of Alice's and other users' resource
set descriptions.
if Alice later decides to entirely remove sharing protection (user
experience only) on this photo while visiting Photoz, ensuring that
the public can get access without any UMA-based protection, Photoz is
responsible for deleting the relevant resource set registration, as
follows:
DELETE /resource_set/112210f47de98100 HTTP/1.1
Host: am.example.com
If-Match: "2"
...
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
10. Acknowledgments
The current editor of this specification is Thomas Hardjono of MIT.
The following people are co-authors:
o Paul C. Bryan, ForgeRock US, Inc. (former editor)
o Domenico Catalano, Oracle Corp.
o Maciej Machulak, Newcastle University
o Eve Maler, XMLgrrl.com
o Lukasz Moren, Newcastle University
o Christian Scholz, COMlounge GmbH (former editor)
Additional contributors to this specification include the Kantara UMA
Work Group participants, a list of whom can be found at
[UMAnitarians].
11. Issues
All issues are now captured at the project's GitHub site
(<https://github.com/xmlgrrl/UMA-Specifications/issues>).
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[OAuth-SAML]
Campbell, B., "SAML 2.0 Bearer Assertion Grant Type
Profile for OAuth 2.0", August 2011,
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/
draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer>.
[OAuth2] Hammer-Lahav, E., "The OAuth 2.0 Protocol",
September 2011,
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-v2>.
[OCDynClientReg]
Sakimura, N., "OpenID Connect Dynamic Client Registration
1.0", September 2011, <http://openid.net/specs/
openid-connect-registration-1_0.html>.
[OCMessages]
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Sakimura, N., "OpenID Connect Messages 1.0",
September 2011,
<http://openid.net/specs/
openid-connect-messages-1_0.html>.
[OCStandard]
Sakimura, N., "OpenID Connect Standard 1.0",
September 2011,
<http://openid.net/specs/
openid-connect-standard-1_0.html>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.
[RFC6415] Hammer-Lahav, E., "Web Host Metadata", October 2011,
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6415>.
12.2. Informative References
[UMA-trustmodel]
Maler, E., "UMA Trust Model", February 2011, <http://
kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/
UMA+Trust+Model>.
[UMA-usecases]
Maler, E., "UMA Scenarios and Use Cases", October 2010, <h
ttp://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/
UMA+Scenarios+and+Use+Cases>.
[UMA-userstories]
Maler, E., "UMA User Stories", November 2010, <http://
kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/
User+Stories>.
[UMAnitarians]
Maler, E., "UMA Participant Roster", 2012, <http://
kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/
Participant+Roster>.
Appendix A. Document History
NOTE: To be removed by RFC editor before publication as an RFC.
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft UMA Core Protocol February 2012
Author's Address
Thomas Hardjono (editor)
MIT
Email: hardjono@mit.edu
Hardjono Expires August 6, 2012 [Page 45]