-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
verifiable consent of visa usage #40
Open
dvoet
wants to merge
5
commits into
ga4gh:master
Choose a base branch
from
dvoet:master
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ | |
|
||
| Version | Date | Editor | Notes | | ||
|---------|---------|--------------------------------------------|-------------------------| | ||
| 1.0.3 | 2020-04 | Douglas Voet | Add audiences to embedded tokens | | ||
| 1.0.2 | 2020-02 | David Bernick | Clarify risk scenarios | | ||
| 1.0.1 | 2019-10 | David Bernick | Clarify that non-GA4GH claims are allowed in tokens | | ||
| 1.0.0 | 2019-10 | Approved by GA4GH Steering Committee | | | ||
|
@@ -397,6 +398,12 @@ the Broker. | |
presented and/or transformed without misrepresenting the original intent, | ||
except for accommodating for `exp` timestamps to be represented as | ||
indicated above. | ||
|
||
3. An Embedded Token Issuer MAY include the `aud` claim to identify the | ||
[Brokers](#term-broker) as the intended audience as specified by | ||
[RFC 7523 Section 3](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7523#section-3). | ||
When an `aud` claim is specified, the values within the `aud` claim MUST | ||
match the `iss` claim of access tokens issued by consented Brokers. | ||
|
||
#### Conformance for Claim Clearinghouses (consuming Access Tokens to give access to data) | ||
|
||
|
@@ -429,6 +436,11 @@ the Broker. | |
any other Broker involved in the propagation of the claims to | ||
also be trusted if the Claim Clearinghouse needs to restrict its | ||
trust model). | ||
2. If an Embedded Token contains an `aud` claim, Clearinghouse MUST check | ||
that one of the Embedded Token's `aud` entries | ||
[matches](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-6.2.1) the Broker's | ||
`iss` claim (i.e. a Broker's access token `iss` claim must match the `aud` | ||
claim within its Embedded Tokens if the Embedded Token aud claim is provided). | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. aud -> |
||
|
||
3. MUST check `exp` to ensure the token has not expired. | ||
|
||
|
@@ -660,7 +672,7 @@ where: | |
4. The payload claims MAY contain at least one GA4GH Claim | ||
(`<ga4gh-spec-claims>`). | ||
|
||
5. The payload claims MUST NOT include `aud`. | ||
5. The payload claims MAY include `aud` to list approved brokers | ||
|
||
##### Embedded Document Token Format | ||
|
||
|
@@ -706,6 +718,8 @@ Issuer. | |
- `<ga4gh-spec-claims>`: OPTIONAL. One or more GA4GH Claims MAY be | ||
provided. See [Authorization/Claims](#authorizationclaims) for an | ||
example. | ||
|
||
- MAY contain `aud` to list approved brokers | ||
|
||
#### Authorization/Claims | ||
|
||
|
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why broker's? The "aud" claim means "audience", so it should match the clearing house's client id, not the broker's issuer id. The audience ("the recipients processing the JWT" as per RFC 7519#4.1.3) is the clearing house, not the broker.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please see the PR summary for what I am trying to achieve.
In addition to allowing the
aud
claim to contain brokers we could say it must also contain clearing houses then the clearing house must verify that it is in the list itself as well as the broker. Essentially the visa issuer would specify all the parties, brokers and clearing houses, who are allowed to use the JWT. This spec would then go above and beyond the JWT RFC by saying the clearing house much check that the broker is in theaud
claim.If
aud
is not the right claim to use then I would propose adding a new claim to the spec and registering that with IANA.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Defining a new claim seems to be a better way to me.