GET /resource HTTP/1.1 Host: frontend.example.com Authorization: Bearer accVkjcJyb4BWCxGsndESCJQbdFMogUC5PbRDqceLTC
Figure 1: Protected Resource Request
The resource server assumes the role of the client for the token exchange and the access token from the request above is sent to the authorization server using a request as specified in Section 2.1. The value of the subject_token parameter carries the access token and the value of the subject_token_type parameter indicates that it is an OAuth 2.0 access token. The resource server, acting in the roll of the client, uses its identifier and secret to authenticate to the authorization server using the HTTP Basic authentication scheme. The resource parameter indicates the location of the backend service, https://backend.example.com/api, where the issued token will be used.
POST /as/token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 Host: as.example.com Authorization: Basic cnMwODpsb25nLXNlY3VyZS1yYW5kb20tc2VjcmV0 Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Atoken-exchange &resource=https%3A%2F%2Fbackend.example.com%2Fapi%20 &subject_token=accVkjcJyb4BWCxGsndESCJQbdFMogUC5PbRDqceLTC &subject_token_type= urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Atoken-type%3Aaccess_token
Figure 2: Token Exchange Request
The authorization server validates the client credentials and the subject_token presented in the token exchange request. From the resource parameter, the authorization server is able to determine the appropriate policy to apply to the request and issues a token suitable for use at https://backend.example.com. The access_token parameter of the response contains the new token, which is itself a bearer OAuth access token that is valid for one minute. The token happens to be a JWT; however, its structure and format are opaque to the client so the issued_token_type indicates only that it is an access token.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/json Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store { "access_token":"eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjllciJ9.eyJhdWQiOiJo dHRwczovL2JhY2tlbmQuZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iLCJpc3MiOiJodHRwczovL2FzLmV 4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDQxOTE3NTkzLCJpYXQiOjE0NDE5MTc1MzMsIn N1YiI6ImJjQGV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwic2NwIjpbImFwaSJdfQ.MXgnpvPMo0nhce PwnQbunD2gw_pDyCFA-Saobl6gyLAdyPbaALFuAOyFc4XTWaPEnHV_LGmXklSTp z0yC7hlSQ", "issued_token_type": "urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token", "token_type":"Bearer", "expires_in":60 }
Figure 3: Token Exchange Response
The resource server can then use the newly acquired access token in making a request to the backend server.
GET /api HTTP/1.1 Host: backend.example.com Authorization: Bearer eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjllciJ9.eyJhdWQ iOiJodHRwczovL2JhY2tlbmQuZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iLCJpc3MiOiJodHRwczovL2 FzLmV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDQxOTE3NTkzLCJpYXQiOjE0NDE5MTc1M zMsInN1YiI6ImJjQGV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwic2NwIjpbImFwaSJdfQ.MXgnpvPMo 0nhcePwnQbunD2gw_pDyCFA-Saobl6gyLAdyPbaALFuAOyFc4XTWaPEnHV_LGmX klSTpz0yC7hlSQ
Figure 4: Backend Protected Resource Request
Additional examples can be found in Appendix A.
3. Token Type Identifiers
Several parameters in this specification utilize an identifier as the value to describe the token in question. Specifically, they are the requested_token_type, subject_token_type, actor_token_type parameters of the request and the issued_token_type member of the response. Token type identifiers are URIs. Token Exchange can work with both tokens issued by other parties and tokens from the given authorization server. For the former the token type identifier indicates the syntax (e.g. JWT or SAML) so the AS can parse it; for the latter it indicates what the AS issued it for (e.g. access_token or refresh_token).
This specification defines the token type identifiers urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token and urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:refresh_token to indicate that the token is an OAuth 2.0 access token or refresh token, respectively. The value urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt defined in Section 9 of [JWT] indicates that the token is a JWT. This specification also defines the token type identifier urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:id_token to indicate that the token is an ID Token, as defined in Section 2 of [OpenID.Core]. Other URIs to indicate other token types MAY be used.
The distinction between an access token and a JWT is subtle. An access token represents a delegated authorization decision, whereas JWT is a token format. An access token can be formatted as a JWT but doesn't necessarily have to be. And a JWT might well be an access token but not all JWTs are access tokens. The intent of this specification is that urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token be an indicator that the token is a typical OAuth access token issued by the authorization server in question, opaque to the client, and usable the same manner as any other access token obtained from that authorization server (it could well be a JWT but the client isn't and needn't be aware of that fact). Whereas urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt is to indicate specifically that a JWT is being requested or sent (perhaps in a cross-domain use-case where the JWT is used as an authorization grant to obtain an access token from a different authorization server as is facilitated by [RFC7523]).
4. JSON Web Token Claims and Introspection Response Parameters
It is useful to have defined mechanisms to express delegation within a token as well as to express authorization to delegate or impersonate. Although the token exchange protocol described herein can be used with any type of token, this section defines claims to express such semantics specifically for JWTs and in an OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection [RFC7662] response. Similar definitions for other types of tokens are possible but beyond the scope of this specification.
4.1. "act" (Actor) Claim
The act (actor) claim provides a means within a JWT to express that delegation has occurred and identify the acting party to whom authority has been delegated. The act claim value is a JSON object and members in the JSON object are claims that identify the actor. The claims that make up the act claim identify and possibly provide additional information about the actor. For example, the combination of the two claims iss and sub might be necessary to uniquely identify an actor.
However, claims within the act claim pertain only to the identity of the actor and are not relevant to the validity of the containing JWT in the same manner as the top-level claims. Consequently, claims such as exp, nbf, and aud are not meaningful when used within an act claim, and therefore should not be used.
The following example illustrates the act (actor) claim within a JWT Claims Set. The claims of the token itself are about user@example.com while the act claim indicates that admin@example.com is the current actor.
{ "aud":"https://consumer.example.com", "iss":"https://issuer.example.com", "exp":1443904177, "nbf":1443904077, "sub":"user@example.com", "act": { "sub":"admin@example.com" } }
Figure 5: Actor Claim
A chain of delegation can be expressed by nesting one act claim within another. The outermost act claim represents the current actor while nested act claims represent prior actors. The least recent actor is the most deeply nested.
The following example illustrates nested act (actor) claims within a JWT Claims Set. The claims of the token itself are about user@example.com while the act claim indicates that the system consumer.example.com-web-application is the current actor and admin@example.com was a prior actor. Such a token might come about as the result of the web application receiving a token like the one in the previous example and exchanging it for a new token that lists it as the current actor and that can be used at https://backend.example.com.
{ "aud":"https://backend.example.com", "iss":"https://issuer.example.com", "exp":1443904100, "nbf":1443904000, "sub":"user@example.com", "act": { "sub":"consumer.example.com-web-application", "iss":"https://issuer.example.net", "act": { "sub":"admin@example.com" } } }
Figure 6: Nested Actor Claim
When included as a top-level member of an OAuth token introspection response, act has the same semantics and format as the the claim of the same name.
4.2. "scp" (Scopes) Claim
The scp claim is an array of strings, each of which represents an OAuth scope granted for the issued security token. Each array entry of the claim value is a scope-token, as defined in Section 3.3 of OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749].
The following example illustrates the scp claim within a JWT Claims Set with four scope-tokens.
{ "aud":"https://consumer.example.com", "iss":"https://issuer.example.com", "exp":1443904177, "nbf":1443904077, "sub":"dgaf4mvfs75Fci_FL3heQA", "scp":["email","address","profile","phone"] }
Figure 7: Scopes Claim
OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection [RFC7662] defines the scope parameter to convey the scopes associated with the token.
4.3. "cid" (Client Identifier) Claim
The cid claim carries the client identifier of the OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] client that requested the token.
The following example illustrates the cid claim within a JWT Claims Set indicating an OAuth 2.0 client with "s6BhdRkqt3" as its identifier.
{ "aud":"https://consumer.example.com", "iss":"https://issuer.example.com", "exp":1443904177, "sub":"user@example.com", "cid":"s6BhdRkqt3" }
Figure 8: Client Identifier Claim
OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection [RFC7662] defines the client_id parameter as the client identifier for the OAuth 2.0 client that requested the token.
4.4. "may_act" (May Act For) Claim
The may_act claim makes a statement that one party is authorized to become the actor and act on behalf of another party. The claim value is a JSON object and members in the JSON object are claims that identify the party that is asserted as being eligible to act for the party identified by the JWT containing the claim. The claims that make up the may_act claim identify and possibly provide additional information about the authorized actor. For example, the combination of the two claims iss and sub are sometimes necessary to uniquely identify an authorized actor, while the email claim might be used to provide additional useful information about that party.
However, claims within the may_act claim pertain only to the identity of that party and are not relevant to the validity of the containing JWT in the same manner as top level claims. Consequently, claims such as exp, nbf, and aud are not meaningful when used within a may_act claim, and therefore should not be used.
The following example illustrates the may_act claim within a JWT Claims Set. The claims of the token itself are about user@example.com while the may_act claim indicates that admin@example.com is authorized to act on behalf of user@example.com.
{ "aud":"https://consumer.example.com", "iss":"https://issuer.example.com", "exp":1443904177, "nbf":1443904077, "sub":"user@example.com", "may_act": { "sub":"admin@example.com" } }
Figure 9: May Act For Claim
When included as a top-level member of an OAuth token introspection response, may_act has the same semantics and format as the the claim of the same name.
5. IANA Considerations
5.1. OAuth URI Registration
This specification registers the following values in the IANA "OAuth URI" registry [IANA.OAuth.Parameters] established by [RFC6755].
5.1.1. Registry Contents
- URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:token-exchange
- Common Name: Token exchange grant type for OAuth 2.0
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification Document: Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token
- Common Name: Token type URI for an OAuth 2.0 access token
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification Document: Section 3 of [[this specification]]
- URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:refresh_token
- Common Name: Token Type URI for an OAuth 2.0 refresh token
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification Document: Section 3 of [[this specification]]
- URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:id_token
- Common Name: Token Type URI for an ID Token
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification Document: Section 3 of [[this specification]]
5.2. OAuth Parameters Registration
This specification registers the following values in the IANA "OAuth Parameters" registry [IANA.OAuth.Parameters] established by [RFC6749].
5.2.1. Registry Contents
- Parameter name: resource
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: audience
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: requested_token_type
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: subject_token
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: subject_token_type
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: actor_token
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: actor_token_type
- Parameter usage location: token request
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Parameter name: issued_token_type
- Parameter usage location: token response
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
5.3. OAuth Access Token Type Registration
This specification registers the following access token type in the IANA "OAuth Access Token Types" registry [IANA.OAuth.Parameters] established by [RFC6749].
5.3.1. Registry Contents
- Type name: N_A
- Additional Token Endpoint Response Parameters: (none)
- HTTP Authentication Scheme(s): (none)
- Change controller: IESG
- Specification document(s): Section 2.2.1 of [[ this specification ]]
5.4. JSON Web Token Claims Registration
This specification registers the following Claims in the IANA "JSON Web Token Claims" registry [IANA.JWT.Claims] established by [JWT].
5.4.1. Registry Contents
- Claim Name: act
- Claim Description: Actor
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Claim Name: scp
- Claim Description: Scope Values
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.2 of [[ this specification ]]
- Claim Name: cid
- Claim Description: Client Identifier
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.3 of [[ this specification ]]
- Claim Name: may_act
- Claim Description: May Act For
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.4 of [[ this specification ]]
5.5. OAuth Token Introspection Response Registration
This specification registers the following values in the IANA "OAuth Token Introspection Response" registry [IANA.OAuth.Parameters] established by [RFC7662].
5.5.1. Registry Contents
- Claim Name: act
- Claim Description: Actor
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.1 of [[ this specification ]]
- Claim Name: may_act
- Claim Description: May Act For
- Change Controller: IESG
- Specification Document(s): Section 4.4 of [[ this specification ]]
5.6. OAuth Extensions Error Registration
This specification registers the following values in the IANA "OAuth Extensions Error" registry [IANA.OAuth.Parameters] established by [RFC6749].
5.6.1. Registry Contents
- Error Name: invalid_target
- Error Usage Location: token error response
- Related Protocol Extension: OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange
- Change Controller: IETF
- Specification Document(s): Section 2.2.2 of [[ this specification ]]
6. Security Considerations
All of the normal security issues that are discussed in [JWT], especially in relationship to comparing URIs and dealing with unrecognized values, also apply here.
In addition, both delegation and impersonation introduce unique security issues. Any time one principal is delegated the rights of another principal, the potential for abuse is a concern. The use of the scp claim is suggested to mitigate potential for such abuse, as it restricts the contexts in which the delegated rights can be exercised.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[IANA.JWT.Claims] | IANA, "JSON Web Token Claims" |
[IANA.OAuth.Parameters] | IANA, "OAuth Parameters" |
[JWT] | Jones, M., Bradley, J. and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015. |
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997. |
[RFC3986] | Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005. |
[RFC6749] | Hardt, D., "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework", RFC 6749, DOI 10.17487/RFC6749, October 2012. |
[RFC7159] | Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March 2014. |
[RFC7662] | Richer, J., "OAuth 2.0 Token Introspection", RFC 7662, DOI 10.17487/RFC7662, October 2015. |
7.2. Informative References
Appendix A. Additional Token Exchange Examples
Two example token exchanges are provided in the following sections illustrating impersonation and delegation, respectively (with extra line breaks and indentation for display purposes only).
A.1. Impersonation Token Exchange Example
A.1.1. Token Exchange Request
In the following token exchange request, a client is requesting a token with impersonation semantics. The client tells the authorization server that it needs a token for use at the target service with the logical name urn:example:cooperation-context.
POST /as/token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 Host: as.example.com Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Atoken-exchange &audience=urn%3Aexample%3Acooperation-context &subject_token=eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjE2In0.eyJhdWQiOiJodHRwc zovL2FzLmV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9vcmlnaW5hbC1pc3N1ZXI uZXhhbXBsZS5uZXQiLCJleHAiOjE0NDE5MTA2MDAsIm5iZiI6MTQ0MTkwOTAwMCwic 3ViIjoiYmNAZXhhbXBsZS5uZXQiLCJzY3AiOlsib3JkZXJzIiwicHJvZmlsZSIsImh pc3RvcnkiXX0.JDe7fZ267iIRXwbFmOugyCt5dmGoy6EeuzNQ3MqDek5cCUlyPhQC6 cz9laKjK1bnjMQbLJqWix6ZdBI0isjsTA &subject_token_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Atoken-type%3Ajwt
Figure 10: Token Exchange Request
A.1.2. Subject Token Claims
The subject_token in the prior request is a JWT and the decoded JWT Claims Set is shown here. The JWT is intended for consumption by the authorization server within a specific time window. The subject of the JWT (bc@example.net) is the party on behalf of whom the new token is being requested.
{ "aud":"https://as.example.com", "iss":"https://original-issuer.example.net", "exp":1441910600, "nbf":1441909000, "sub":"bc@example.net", "scp":["orders","profile","history"] }
Figure 11: Subject Token Claims
A.1.3. Token Exchange Response
The access_token parameter of the token exchange response shown below contains the new token that the client requested. The other parameters of the response indicate that the token is a bearer access token that expires in an hour.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/json Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store { "access_token":"eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjcyIn0.eyJhdWQiOiJ1cm4 6ZXhhbXBsZTpjb29wZXJhdGlvbi1jb250ZXh0IiwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hcy5l eGFtcGxlLmNvbSIsImV4cCI6MTQ0MTkxMzYxMCwic3ViIjoiYmNAZXhhbXBsZS5uZ XQiLCJzY3AiOlsib3JkZXJzIiwiaGlzdG9yeSIsInByb2ZpbGUiXX0.YQHuLmI1YD TugbfEvgGY2gaGBmMyj9BepZSECCBE9j9ogqZv2qx6VQQPrbT1k7vBYGLNMOkkpmm JkxZDS0YV7g", "issued_token_type": "urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token", "token_type":"Bearer", "expires_in":3600 }
Figure 12: Token Exchange Response
A.1.4. Issued Token Claims
The decoded JWT Claims Set of the issued token is shown below. The new JWT is issued by the authorization server and intended for consumption by a system entity known by the logical name urn:example:cooperation-context any time before its expiration. The subject (sub) of the JWT is the same as the subject the token used to make the request, which effectively enables the client to impersonate that subject at the system entity known by the logical name of urn:example:cooperation-context by using the token.
{ "aud":"urn:example:cooperation-context", "iss":"https://as.example.com", "exp":1441913610, "sub":"bc@example.net", "scp":["orders","history","profile"] }
Figure 13: Issued Token Claims
A.2. Delegation Token Exchange Example
A.2.1. Token Exchange Request
In the following token exchange request, a client is requesting a token and providing both a subject_token and an actor_token. The client tells the authorization server that it needs a token for use at the target service with the logical name urn:example:cooperation-context. Policy at the authorization server dictates that the issued token be a composite.
POST /as/token.oauth2 HTTP/1.1 Host: as.example.com Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded grant_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Agrant-type%3Atoken-exchange &audience=urn%3Aexample%3Acooperation-context &subject_token=eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjE2In0.eyJhdWQiOiJodHRwc zovL2FzLmV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9vcmlnaW5hbC1pc3N1ZXI uZXhhbXBsZS5uZXQiLCJleHAiOjE0NDE5MTAwNjAsInNjcCI6WyJzdGF0dXMiLCJmZ WVkIl0sInN1YiI6InVzZXJAZXhhbXBsZS5uZXQiLCJtYXlfYWN0Ijp7InN1YiI6ImF kbWluQGV4YW1wbGUubmV0In19.ut0Ll7wm920VzRvuLGLFoPJLeO5DDElxsax1L_xK Um2eooiNSfuif-OGa2382hPyFYnddKIa0wmDhQksW018Rw &subject_token_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Atoken-type%3Ajwt &actor_token=eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjE2In0.eyJhdWQiOiJodHRwczo vL2FzLmV4YW1wbGUuY29tIiwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9vcmlnaW5hbC1pc3N1ZXIuZ XhhbXBsZS5uZXQiLCJleHAiOjE0NDE5MTAwNjAsInN1YiI6ImFkbWluQGV4YW1wbGU ubmV0In0.7YQ-3zPfhUvzje5oqw8COCvN5uP6NsKik9CVV6cAOf4QKgM-tKfiOwcgZ oUuDL2tEs6tqPlcBlMjiSzEjm3yBg &actor_token_type=urn%3Aietf%3Aparams%3Aoauth%3Atoken-type%3Ajwt
Figure 14: Token Exchange Request
A.2.2. Subject Token Claims
The subject_token in the prior request is a JWT and the decoded JWT Claims Set is shown here. The JWT is intended for consumption by the authorization server before a specific expiration time. The subject of the JWT (user@example.net) is the party on behalf of whom the new token is being requested.
{ "aud":"https://as.example.com", "iss":"https://original-issuer.example.net", "exp":1441910060, "scp":["status","feed"], "sub":"user@example.net", "may_act": { "sub":"admin@example.net" } }
Figure 15: Subject Token Claims
A.2.3. Actor Token Claims
The actor_token in the prior request is a JWT and the decoded JWT Claims Set is shown here. This JWT is also intended for consumption by the authorization server before a specific expiration time. The subject of the JWT (admin@example.net) is the actor that will wield the security token being requested.
{ "aud":"https://as.example.com", "iss":"https://original-issuer.example.net", "exp":1441910060, "sub":"admin@example.net" }
Figure 16: Actor Token Claims
A.2.4. Token Exchange Response
The access_token parameter of the token exchange response shown below contains the new token that the client requested. The other parameters of the response indicate that the token is a JWT that expires in an hour and that the access token type is not applicable since the issued token is not an access token.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/json Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store { "access_token":"eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjcyIn0.eyJhdWQiOiJ1cm4 6ZXhhbXBsZTpjb29wZXJhdGlvbi1jb250ZXh0IiwiaXNzIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9hcy5l eGFtcGxlLmNvbSIsImV4cCI6MTQ0MTkxMzYxMCwic2NwIjpbInN0YXR1cyIsImZlZ WQiXSwic3ViIjoidXNlckBleGFtcGxlLm5ldCIsImFjdCI6eyJzdWIiOiJhZG1pbk BleGFtcGxlLm5ldCJ9fQ._qjM7Ij_HcrC78omT4jiZTFJOuzsAj1wPo31ymQS-Suq r64S1jCp6pfQR-in_OOAosAGamEg4jyPsht6kMAiYA", "issued_token_type":"urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt", "token_type":"N_A", "expires_in":3600 }
Figure 17: Token Exchange Response
A.2.5. Issued Token Claims
The decoded JWT Claims Set of the issued token is shown below. The new JWT is issued by the authorization server and intended for consumption by a system entity known by the logical name urn:example:cooperation-context any time before its expiration. The subject (sub) of the JWT is the same as the subject of the subject_token used to make the request. The actor (act) of the JWT is the same as the subject of the actor_token used to make the request. This indicates delegation and identifies admin@example.net as the current actor to whom authority has been delegated to act on behalf of user@example.net.
{ "aud":"urn:example:cooperation-context", "iss":"https://as.example.com", "exp":1441913610, "scp":["status","feed"], "sub":"user@example.net", "act": { "sub":"admin@example.net" } }
Figure 18: Issued Token Claims
Appendix B. Acknowledgements
This specification was developed within the OAuth Working Group, which includes dozens of active and dedicated participants. It was produced under the chairmanship of Hannes Tschofenig and Derek Atkins with Kathleen Moriarty and Stephen Farrell serving as Security Area Directors. The following individuals contributed ideas, feedback, and wording to this specification:
Caleb Baker, Vittorio Bertocci, Thomas Broyer, William Denniss, Vladimir Dzhuvinov, Phil Hunt, Benjamin Kaduk, Jason Keglovitz, Torsten Lodderstedt, Adam Lewis, James Manger, Nov Matake, Matt Miller, Matthew Perry, Justin Richer, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef, Scott Tomilson, and Hannes Tschofenig.
Appendix C. Document History
[[ to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as an RFC ]]
-07
- Fixed typo (desecration -> discretion).
- Added an explanation of the relationship between scope, audience and resource in the request and added an "invalid_target" error code enabling the AS to tell the client that the requested audiences/resources were too broad.
-06
- Drop "An STS for the REST of Us" from the title.
- Drop "heavyweight" and "lightweight" from the abstract and introduction.
- Clarifications on the language around xxxxxx_token_type.
- Remove the want_composite parameter.
- Add a short mention of proof-of-possession style tokens to the introduction and remove the respective open issue.
-05
- Defined the JWT claim cid to express the OAuth 2.0 client identifier of the client that requested the token.
- Defined and requested registration for act and may_act as Token introspection response parameters (in addition to being JWT claims).
- Loosen up the language about refresh_token in the response to OPTIONAL from NOT RECOMMENDED based on feedback form real world deployment experience.
- Add clarifying text about the distinction between JWT and access token URIs.
- Close out (remove) some of the Open Issues bullets that have been resolved.
-04
- Clarified that the "resource" and "audience" request parameters can be used at the same time (via http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg15335.html).
- Clarified subject/actor token validity after token exchange and explained a bit more about the recommendation to not issue refresh tokens (via http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg15318.html).
- Updated the examples appendix to use an issuer value that doesn't imply that the client issued and signed the tokens and used "Bearer" and "urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token" in one of the responses (via http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg15335.html).
- Defined and registered urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:id_token, since some use cases perform token exchanges for ID Tokens and no URI to indicate that a token is an ID Token had previously been defined.
-03
- Updated the document editors (adding Campbell, Bradley, and Mortimore).
- Added to the title.
- Added to the abstract and introduction.
- Updated the format of the request to use application/x-www-form-urlencoded request parameters and the response to use the existing token endpoint JSON parameters defined in OAuth 2.0.
- Changed the grant type identifier to urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:token-exchange.
- Added RFC 6755 registration requests for urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:refresh_token, urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:access_token, and urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:token-exchange.
- Added RFC 6749 registration requests for request/response parameters.
- Removed the Implementation Considerations and the requirement to support JWTs.
- Clarified many aspects of the text.
- Changed on_behalf_of to subject_token, on_behalf_of_token_type to subject_token_type, act_as to actor_token, and act_as_token_type to actor_token_type.
- Added an audience request parameter used to indicate the logical names of the target services at which the client intends to use the requested security token.
- Added a want_composite request parameter used to indicate the desire for a composite token rather than trying to infer it from the presence/absence of token(s) in the request.
- Added a resource request parameter used to indicate the URLs of resources at which the client intends to use the requested security token.
- Specified that multiple audience and resource request parameter values may be used.
- Defined the JWT claim act (actor) to express the current actor or delegation principal.
- Defined the JWT claim may_act to express that one party is authorized to act on behalf of another party.
- Defined the JWT claim scp (scopes) to express OAuth 2.0 scope-token values.
- Added the N_A (not applicable) OAuth Access Token Type definition for use in contexts in which the token exchange syntax requires a token_type value, but in which the token being issued is not an access token.
- Added examples.
-02
- Enabled use of Security Token types other than JWTs for act_as and on_behalf_of request values.
- Referenced the JWT and OAuth Assertions RFCs.
-01
- Updated references.
-00
- Created initial working group draft from draft-jones-oauth-token-exchange-01.