The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR)
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "IETF-Announce" <email@example.com> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Kathleen.Moriarty.firstname.lastname@example.org, "The IESG" <email@example.com>, Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: Protocol Action: 'The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR)' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-11.txt) The IESG has approved the following document: - 'The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: JWT Secured Authorization Request (JAR)' (draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq-11.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Web Authorization Protocol Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Kathleen Moriarty. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-oauth-jwsreq/
Technical Summary The authorization request in OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] utilizes query parameter serialization, which means that Authorization Request parameters are encoded in the URI of the request and sent through user agents such as web browsers. While it is easy to implement, it means that (a) the communication through the user agents are not integrity protected and thus the parameters can be tainted, and (b) the source of the communication is not authentciated. Because of these weaknesses, several attacks to the protocol have now been put forward. This document introduces the ability to send request parameters in a JSON Web Token (JWT) instead, which allows the request to be JWS signed and/or JWE encrypted so that the integrity, source authentication and confidentiallity property of the Authorization Request is attained. The request can be sent by value or by reference. Working Group Summary Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting? For example, was there controversy about particular points or were there decisions where the consensus was particularly rough? Document Quality There are a number of implementations, both vendor and open source and there was good support in the working group. Personnel Hannes Tschofenig is the document shepherd and the responsible area director is Kathleen Moriarty.