Internet-Draft | OIDCATT | August 2023 |
Smith & Hardjono | Expires 10 February 2024 | [Page] |
This document defines message flows and extensions to OpenID-Connect (OIDC) messages that support attestation. Attestation Evidence and Attestation Results is accessed via appropriate APIs that presumably require authorization using OAuth 2.0 access tokens. A common use case for OIDC is retrieval of user identity information authorized by an OIDC identity token. The Relying Party may require Attestation Results that describes the trust properties of the UserInfo Endpoint. Trust properties may be a condition of accepting the user identity information.¶
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.¶
The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://nedmsmith.github.io/draft-sh-rats-oidc-attest/draft-sh-rats-oidcatt.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sh-rats-oidcatt/.¶
Discussion of this document takes place on the Remote ATtestation ProcedureS Working Group mailing list (mailto:rats@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/. Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats/.¶
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/nedmsmith/draft-sh-rats-oidc-attest.¶
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 10 February 2024.¶
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
This document defines attestation conceptual message flows that extend OpenID-Connect (OIDC) messages, see [OCC2014]. Attestation Evidence and Attestation Results are RATS conceptual messages, see [RFC9334] and [I-D.ftbs-rats-msg-wrap], that are obtained via appropriate APIs conditional on OAuth 2.0 access tokens [RFC6749]. A common use case for OIDC is retrieval of user identity information authorized by an OIDC identity token. The Relying Party may require Attestation Results regarding the UserInfo Endpoint as a condition of accepting the user identity information.¶
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
This specification uses role names as defined by Remote ATtestation procedureS (RATS), [RFC9334] and OpenID Connect (OIDC), [OCC2014]. If role names conflict, (e.g., Relying Party), then the RATS role is qualified by prepending ‘RATS’ or ‘R’. For example, the RATS Relying Party is disambiguated as ‘RRP’.¶
A summary of roles used in this specification is provided here for convenience.¶
RATS roles are as follows:¶
OIDC roles are as follows:¶
OAuth 2.0 roles are as follows:¶
OpenID-Connect (OIDC) [OCC2014] defines user authentication protocol and messages based on OAuth 2.0 [RFC6749] authorization protocol and messages. This section shows an example OIDC protocol sequence with extensions for attestation Evidence and Attestation Results (AR) exchanges. The protocol is divided into two phases. A setup phase and an operational phase. The setup phase models protocol initialization steps that are anticipated but often ignored. An understanding of the initialization steps may be helpful when determining how various steps in the operational phase are authorized.¶
The example protocol message exchange involves four main endpoints:¶
The setup phase creates the various identity (‘id-token’) and access (‘access-token’) credentials that are used during the operational phase to authorize the exchange of the various OIDC protocol messages.¶
In this example, there is a single end user, “Alice”, that creates an identity token ‘id-token’. The Native App signals the UE when it is appropriate to create the id-token. For example, the 'id-token' contains: { "sub": "A21CE", "name": "Alice" }.¶
The RA exposes an attestation API that invokes the attestation capabilities of the Attester device. An access token, ‘access-token-attest’, is needed to authorize use of the attestation API.¶
The UE exposes a UserInfo API that invokes the user information capabilities of the User Agent. An access token, ‘access-token-uinfo’, is needed to authorize use of the UserInfo API.¶
The RV exposes an API for appraising Evidence. An access token, ‘access-token-appraisal’, is needed to authorize use of the appraisal API.¶
The Attester device is registered with the RP client in anticipation of subsequent operational flows. The registration process is out of scope for this document.¶
The RA produces an Evidence payload that is conveyed to the RV. Some OIDC messages are extended to carry Evidence.¶
The RV produces an Attestation Results payload that is conveyed to the RP. Some OIDC messages are extended to carry Attestation Results.¶
The operational phase protocol builds on the abstract OIDC protocol in [OCC2014]. The five OIDC steps are described here for convenience and attestation related steps are described as sub-steps.¶
The RP sends an AuthN request to the OP containing the RP’s identity ‘client-id’. Additionally, the RP includes an attestation scope, e.g., ‘scope=”device-attest”’ that instructs the OP to obtain an attestation from the UE device. The trigger for sending the AuthN request is out of scope for this document.¶
The following non-normative AuthN Request payload example identifies the OP server location, the RP client identity, and an attestation scope:¶
AuthN_Req = { "location": https://op.example.com/authn" "client_id": "s6BhdRkqt3", "scope": "device-attest" }¶
The OP forwards the original AuthN request to the UE. The attestation scope instructs the UE to configure the device for attestation. For example, an internal interface between the UE and RA (a.k.a., Resource Server) might be used to configure a ‘client-id’ nonce that the RA Attesting Environment includes with attestation Evidence. The UE normally returns a payload containing the ‘client-id’, response type (i.e., resp-type = “code”), and the authentication result (i.e., authn-proof). However, a successful response is returned on condition of successful configuration of the attestation scope. The End User may consent to the disclosure of attestation Evidence using the 'prompt' parameter. An "attestation-consent" authorization string is supplied as one of the 'prompt' parameters. * *attestation-consent - The OP (a.k.a., Authorization Server) SHOULD prompt the End User for consent before returning information to the RP (a.k.a., Client). If it cannot obtain attestation consent, it MUST return an error, typically 'consent_required'.¶
The forwarded AuthN Request is identical to AuthN Request. The forwarded AuthN Response payload example identifies the originating RP, scope, response type, and authentication proof:¶
AuthN_Rsp = { "client_id": "s6BhdRkqt3", "scope": "device-attest", "resp_type": "code", "authn_proof": "<tbd>" }¶
If the End User doesn’t opt-out of attestation, the OP requests attestation Evidence from the RA (as a Resource Server). The OP sends the ‘access-token-attest’ and ‘id-token = “Alice”’ tokens to the RA. The RA collects Evidence according to the configured attestation scope. For example, if a ‘client-id’ specific nonce was configured, the nonce is included with Evidence. The Evidence is returned to the OP through the UE, which normally returns the ‘client-id’, ‘access-token’, and ‘id-token’.¶
The Attestation Request and Response payload example contains an access_token that authorizes use of the attestation API of the RA and an id_token that identifies the End User.¶
access_token = { "iss": "https://jwt-op.example.com", "sub": "https://jwt-ra.example.com/24400320", "aud": "https://jwt-rp.example.com/s6BhdRkqt3", "nbf": 1300815780, "exp": 1300819380, "claims.example.com/attest-api": true }¶
id_token = { "iss": "https://jwt-op.example.com", "sub": "https://jwt-ra.example.com/24400320", "aud": "https://jwt-rp.example.com/s6BhdRkqt3", "nbf": 1300815780, "exp": 1300819380, "name": "Alice" }¶
The response payload contains an Evidence value as described by a conceptual message wrapper [I-D.ftbs-rats-msg-wrap].¶
evidence_cmw = [ "application/eat+jwt", "<base64-string containing a JWT>" ]¶
The OP requests appraisal of Evidence by sending the ‘access-token-appraisal’ token and Evidence to the RV. The token authorizes use of the appraisal API, which when appraisal completes, supplies Attestation Results. The verification response contains the Attestation Results and ‘access-token’, that the RV sends to the OP.¶
The Appraisal Request payload example contains an access_token that authorizes use of the appraisal API of the RV and the Evidence to be appraised.¶
access_token = { "iss": "https://jwt-op.example.com", "sub": "https://jwt-rv.example.com", "aud": "https://jwt-rp.example.com/s6BhdRkqt3", "nbf": 1300815780, "exp": 1300819380, "claims.example.com/appraisal-api": true }¶
evidence_cmw = [ "application/eat+jwt", "<base64-string containing a JWT>" ]¶
The response payload contains an Attestation Results value as described by a conceptual message wrapper [I-D.ftbs-rats-msg-wrap].¶
attestation_result_cmw = [ "application/eat+jwt", "<base64-string containing a JWT>" ]¶
The OP sends ‘client-id’, ‘id-token = “Alice”’, ‘access-token-uinfo’, and the Attestation Results to the RP. The RP processes the Attestation Results to determine if the UE device is trustworthy. Presumably, if the UE isn’t trustworthy, the protocol is terminated.¶
TODO add example¶
The UserInfo request is initiated by the RP, who sends ‘client-id’, ‘id-token = “Alice”’, and ‘access-token-uinfo’ to the UE to collect user identity information. The UserInfo response is initiated by the UE, who sends ‘client-id’, ‘id-token = “Alice”’, ‘access-token-uinfo’, and the UserInfo payload to the RP to process user claims and complete the OIDC protocol.¶
TODO add example¶
TODO Security¶
This document has no IANA actions.¶
The authors would like to thank the following people for their input:¶