I am trying to implement OpenId Connect for SSO in one of my projects. However, I am a bit struggling with the case where I would like to validate OpenId JWT token on Resource Server side to make it stateless. If user tries to logout, authorization Server will know about the user logout (Accordingly OpenId Connect Session Management spec). But how should Authorization Server tell Resource Server that the user's token is not valid anymore? It is a case when user after log out out goes to Resource Server with his OpenId token and gets access. That is weird and I could not find any solution across Internet. Please help me to organize stateless security with central logout.
You can use Token Introspection endpoint to determine whether the access token passed is valid or not. The resource server can make a call to OP's introspection endpoint to validate the token before giving access to the resource. In order to effectively validate the token, the resource server should :
Be a registered client with OP and have Same / similar Scope as SPA app (Implicit flow app) to validate the scopes passed to it and
Have access to Introspection endpoint
The are more details in the above linked Spec for further understanding.
P.S. The answer that I wrote earlier has some other relevant references.
you can use jwt bearer flow, where you can pass ID token/Assertion token to OP in order to generate access token.
Related
I am working on the ASP.NET MVC 5 web application. It has only one layer which contains views as well as business logic/operations. Business logic is logically separated from UI but it is not behind a separate web service/API layer.
Now when I use OIDC and OAuth2.0 for my application, there is no separate Resource Server, so to say. Because Client itself has all the Resources I want to have access to.
I am using Authorization Code Flow for authentication & authorization.
Questions:
Does access token have any role in this case? If yes, what?
How am I going to practically use the access token? Since the client itself is the resource server, there is nothing to which I need to send access token to.
I guess you get an ID token which contains all the information you need for authentication of a user. If not, you can use the access token to get the user info. If this is all the information you need, then the access token is not needed anymore. This happens, because OAuth2 is a permission delegation protocol, not an authentication protocol in a first place.
When you have the user info, you can implement between the browser and your ASP.NET backend in any way. You can take a look at the OAuth 2.0 for Browser-Based Apps RFC.
In this case you should use Client Credential flow instead of Authorization Code flow.
In Client Credential flow, your application would send your client id & client secret to Authorization Endpoint directly and asking for access token. Authorization Code is not needed in Client Credential flow. Details as below
An authorization code flow typically need your client redirect
resource owner to authorization endpoint and get a authorization
code from authorization endpoint, client than uses this code to get
access token, at the end of the day client uses access token to
access protected resource.
In Client Crendential flow. your client app is actually the owner of
your resource. So no need to asking for a authorization code. direct
uses its own client credential to get access token from
authorization endpoint and use that access token to access protected
resource(Resource server)
If I authenticate with OpenID connect, I can authenticate my SPA ok.
How do I use the obtained access token now to access my own REST resources?
It's a simple question, but I don't find satisfactory answers.
A prominent answer I always find is 'use oidc when you don't have a backend'.
Now that makes me wonder if ever a webapp was created that didn't need a backend.
Oidc is almost always the answer when the question of storing a refresh token in the client pops up (like in 'use oidc, it's a better architecture and ditch the refresh token') but it doesn't really explain anything.
So when the user logs in with, say Google, he obtains an identity and an access token (to ensure that the user is who he claims he is).
So how do you use this to authenticate at your own REST service?
The only real way I see it as stateless is by sending another request at the server to the provider on every request to the REST api, to match the identity to the validity of the access token there.
If not, we fall back to the good 'ol session vs jwt discussion, which doesn't quite seem to click with the oidc because now we're duplicating authentication logic.
And the good 'ol refresh token in the browser is generally promoted as a bad idea, although you can keep access tokens in the browser session storage (according to the js oidc client library), autorefresh them with the provider and that's fine then (-.-).
I'm running again circles.
Anybody can lay this out for me and please break the loop?
Your SPA (frontend) needs to add an authorization header with access token to each API request. Frontend should implement the authorization code flow + PKCE (implicit flow is not recommended anymore) + it needs to refresh access token.
Your API (backend) needs to implement OIDC (or you can use "oidc auth" proxy in front of backend) - it just validates access token, eventually returns 401 (Unauthorized) for request with invalid/expired/... token. This token validation is stateless, because it needs only public key(s) to verify token signature + current timestamp. Public keys are usually downloaded when backends is starting from OIDC discovery URL, so they doesn't need to be redownloaded during every backend request.
BTW: refresh token in the browser is bad idea, because refresh token is equivalent of your own credentials
I am new to OAuth and OpenId, and after reading multiple pages and information I still do not feel confident at all.
My goal would be to create an iOS Application that communicates with my BE. I need the iOS app to authenticate the user to access their resources.
Reading about OAuth, the solution seems to be straight forward. Just use the Authorization Code Flow with PKCE to make the App have an Access Token. This way I am authorizing my iOS app to access user's data. When the iOS app calls https://example.org/user with the access token, the resource service (my BE server) can get the access token and call the introspection API to know to which user the access token is bound to, and return the correct user data. Since authorization needs authentication to be made in the first place, having the access token would mean that the user is (or at least was) authenticated.
First thing that confuses me: According to the OAuth specs, OAuth is not an authentication protocol, but still the protocol authenticates the user using the user's credentials. Why is OAuth asking the user for credentials, instead of relying on another protocol/flow for user authentication? Such protocol would just acknowledge to OAuth that the authentication was successful.
This first issue made me start reading about Open ID Connect specification and the ID Token. This token would be received by the iOS app. What is the iOS App supposed to do with it? I can already get the user information calling the /user endpoint. How would this ID Token be an advantage?
tldr
Access token (OAuth 2.0) - authorize against OAuth protected
endpoints.
ID Token (OIDC) - authentiation by client application.
Authorization server authentication - It's there to detect
authenticity of end user involved in both protocols (pseudo
authentication from client application perspective)
OAuth is not an authentication protocol, but still the protocol contain a step to authenticate the user using the user's credentials
Correct, OAuth is not an authentication protocol. It is for authorization, which means identifying there are correct access grants to access a protected resource (protected resource ? ex:- An API, A photo stored in a backend).
So why you see end user login dialog ? Well that is the job of authorization server. It authenticate end user to be known by it and then issue the access token to client (client == in simple terms the application which end user uses). So yes there is an authenitcation happening, but this is not applicable to your client application or protected endpoint. One can define this as an pseudo authentication.
OpenID Connect - For authentication of client application
In the original RFC (RFC-6749), OAuth 2.0 was defined as a framework. OpenID Connect was an extension that built on this framework. What it provide ? Well as you found out, it introduce the ID Token. And ID token is issued by authorization server to be consumed by your client application. It contains end user identity information in JWT format. By validating integrity of this token, your client application can authenticate the end user. And access token ? That's there to used against protected endpoint. It doesn't say anything about end user to client.
I've read a number of different write-ups on this now, but I'm still unclear as to the primary value that OpenID Connect provides on top of OAuth 2.0.
My understanding:
When receiving an access token via the OAuth 2.0 flow, the client does come to know that the user was authenticated by the authorization server. It seems like OpenID Connect is just adding an ID token with user information - but that information could be part of the access token or available through a protected resource (like a separate userDetails resource). That doesn't seem to justify the creation of OpenID Connect, so I'm sure that I'm missing something...
Thanks for your help!
Adding more details that are too long for a comment. Thanks much for your help so far.
I think I'm getting closer, thanks to your responses. So I reviewed this article: http://oauth.net/articles/authentication/. It says that "OAuth says absolutely nothing about the user". However, you are trusting that same service to authenticate the End-User before issuing an Access Token. In the "common pitfalls section", the article discusses why you can't use access token for authentication. I have the following issues with that in my understanding:
Access token as proof of authentication
The access token was proof of authentication at some prior point. If the Client does want to authenticate the user at some point after getting an access token, why not just repeat the existing Oauth flow with the current end-user trying to access the client?
Access of a protected resource as proof
Same as above - if the client requires authentication at any point, repeat the Oauth flow.
Injection of access tokens
Not clear how OpenID helps this
Lack of audience restriction
Why is it harder to hand a naive client a valid ID token along with the access token? Is this relevant at all to the server-side flow? And again, can repeat the OAuth flow if needed.
Injection of invalid user information
This seems to require a signature, not a separate token. If the OAuth flow takes place over HTTPS, is it adding any security for the identity provider to sign user details twice?
Different protocols for every potential identity provider
This seems fair, but it still seems strange if the only purpose would be standardization of the token used for user information.
An OAuth access token is opaque to the Client and could have been provided by anyone, which means that it is not necessarily handed to the Client by a logged in user. An attacker could provide an access token to the Client that it got from a different user in its own (not necessarily malicious) service. The ID token from OpenID Connect make sure that the user was logged in recently at the OP and provides information about that user that can be verified by the Client. Moreover the ID token is targeted specifically to your Client.
The differences are described pretty well in http://oauth.net/articles/authentication/
An ID token can be signed by the authentication server. A client application can verify the signature to confirm that the end-user has been authenticated by the very authentication server. Access token + protected resource call do not provide such a mechanism.
In addition, OpenID Connect has introduced other mechanisms related to authentication such as:
Authentication Context Class Reference
Maximum Authentication Age
sub claim in claims request parameter
to satisfy higher-level security requirements by governments.
Read OpenID Connect Core 1.0 and other related specifications. Also, you may find "Authorization interaction" helpful as a summary about what OpenID Connect has added to control end-user authentication.
OAuth 2.0 is about granting a third party limited access to a resource. The RFC starts with
The OAuth 2.0 authorization framework enables a third-party
application to obtain limited access to an HTTP service...
OpenID Connect is about establishing an end-user's identity. The OpenID Connect Core spec starts with
OpenID Connect 1.0 is a simple identity layer on top of the OAuth 2.0
protocol. It enables Clients to verify the identity of the End-User
based on the authentication performed by an Authorization Server...
In OAuth 2.0, when a resource server receives a request containing an access token, the resource server knows that the resource owner has granted a third party access to a resource. The access token represents this approval but it does not identify the third party who is presenting it.
If a company thinks someone like Salesforce or Google is better equiped than they are to manage user accounts, passwords, digital certificates, etc., the company could use OpenID Connect to essentially "outsource" that responsibility to an OpenID Connect Provider. When the company receives an id token in the context of an OpenID Connect flow, it knows that the provider has authenticated the end-user and established the user's identity.
OpenID Connect has repurposed the OAuth 2.0 flows so that the identity of an end-user can be established.
I am following this tutorial about OAuth2.0 https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/guides/authentication
It looks quite clear how OAuth2.0 works. But I have a bit confusion at the access token part.
After obtaining an access token for a user, your application can use
that token to submit authorized API requests on that user's behalf.
The API supports two ways to specify an access token: Specify the
access token as the value of the access_token query parameter:
www.googleapis.com/youtube/v3/videos?access_token=ACCESS_TOKEN
if someone acquired this access token during the url transferring they can access this protected resource right?
How the server know if the request is coming from the client initially requested the access token?
UPDATE:
after reading this post Are HTTPS headers encrypted? my confusion is cleared. I thought query string is not encrypted during transmission in the network.
Generally I think the consensus is that OAuth 2.0 is a server side technology and all access tokens and communication should be transmitted using SSL as the bearer tokens need to be kept as secure as possible.
Also, you need to know that there are 2 types of flows in OAuth 2.0
i) Implicit grant flow - This is the flow where the user logs in to the service provider and his browser gets the access token. Say you have X.com and Log in via Facebook. Once the user keys in his FB credentials, the access token is sent to his browser.
ii) Authorization Code flow - In this flow (consider the above situation again), facebook will pass an authorization code to the user's browser. If anyone, somehow, intercepts the authorization code there is nothing he can do. An authorization code can be exchanged for an access when passed with valid client credentials. So, when the user logs in, his browser gets an authorization code which is passed to your server at X.com. from there you would hit the code-token exchange endpoint provided by FB and get the access token returned to your server!
Authorization code flow adds another layer of security, where the access token is visible only to the client + server and not to the user agent. And as you figured out yourself, the token is passed via HTTPS.