Next in thread → Next in month →

Re: I changed my mind about eliminating the Web browser "Post" profil e

From
Anders Rundgren <>
Date
2001-08-31T15:03:53+00:00
ID
017701c1322c$899ea570$0500a8c0@arport
Thread
Re: I changed my mind about eliminating the Web browser "Post" profil e
Hal,

I'm pleased to see that you changed your mind 
regarding the

POST profile as it can eliminate the need for 
additional

server-state that Artifacts introduce.  I 
still think that

the bindings group should take a look on the issues 
raised in:

 

   http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200108/msg00166.html

 

The earlier mentioned 
"JavaScript security issue" can be made much less

of a choice by actually letting the user's browser 
do the "decision".

If JavaScript-based solutions must be as 
appendices, the following

code belongs there:

 

<HTML>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" 
>
<FORM METHOD="POST" 
ACTION="Destination-URL">
<NOSCRIPT>
<CENTER><H2>Your 
browser is JavaScript-disabled!</H2>
<H3>Click on the button 
below to manually continue the login</H3>
<INPUT TYPE="SUBMIT" 
VALUE="Continue"></CENTER>
</NOSCRIPT>
<INPUT 
TYPE="HIDDEN" NAME="SAMLAssertion" VALUE="Assertion in 
Base64-coding">
</FORM>
</BODY>
</HTML>

 

Only to please (?) you we have added this fallback 
code to our SAML-inspired

Purple demo so you can try with or without 
JavaScript enabled in your browser.

 

   https://buyer.x-obi.com

Note: Don't try to run the "seller" app as it 
does not perform as expected

without JavaScript.  Only authentication 
works.

 

My referred-to document has been updated 
accordingly:

  http://www.x-obi.com/OBI400/andersr-browser-artifact.ppt

 

Regards 

Anders

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Hal Lockhart" <>

To: <>

Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 16:41

Subject: I changed my mind about eliminating the 
Web browser "Post" profil e

At the F2F I agreed to document my 
proposal to drop the Browser "Form Post"
Profile.  My reason was a hope 
we could avoid "Bearer" Assertions entirely.

I have been convinced that 
Bearer Assertions will be required. I can live
this providing:

1. They 
are clearly labled as such. (The current spec is almost there.)
2. They are 
only used in profiles where absolutely necessary.
3. Appropriate analysis is 
provided in Security Considerations.

As a consequence, I now agree with 
Prateek that we should continue to
develop both the "artifact" and the "Form 
Post" variants of the Browser
profile. The issue of which one or both is 
mandatory to implement can be
discussed 
later.

Hal

----------------------------------------------------------------
To 
subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: 
<http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
Next in thread → Next in month →