Re: [abacus] Securing REST endpoints using OAuth bearer access token
Jean-Sebastien Delfino
Unless I missed something in my reading of section 3-1 of RFC 6350, I don't
see where it suggests that we'd need to validate all required parameters of the request *before* authenticating. The spec describes status code 400 before 401 and 403, but could that be just because 400 < 401 < 403? I'm not sure that necessarily translates to a sequencing of the checks associated with each status code. Here's my interpretation of the section about the 400 status code -- which could very well be wrong, it's just my interpretation :) invalid_requestAIUI RFC 6350 doesn't mandate any parameter, so I'm not sure why this is even mentioned here. The spec actually discourages the use of (URI query and Form-Encoded) parameters for authorization so I'd advocate for not polluting the code with support for these parameters in the first place. I'm also not reading that sentence as requiring the validation of other application specific parameters (well outside the scope of RFC 6350) to be performed *before* the authentication check. includes an unsupported parameter or parameter value,Makes sense to me, we could reject these OAuth authorization parameters with a 400. repeats the same parameter,Same here, reject one or more, basically any, authorization parameters. uses more than one method for including an access token,The above logic would apply here too, we'd only support the Authorization header (and just one). or is otherwise malformedOther malformations of that Authorization header would translate to a 400 as well. Thoughts? -- Jean-Sebastien On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Saravanakumar A Srinivasan < sasrin(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: I am working on implementing (see Github commit at [1] for more details)
|
|