RFC 1 | AuthZEN RAR Profile | July 2024 |
Brossard, et al. | Informational | [Page] |
This specification defines a profile of OAuth 2.0 Rich Authorization Requests leveraging the OpenID AuthZEN authorization request/response formats within the authorization_details
JSON object. Authorization servers and resource servers from different vendors can leverage this profile to request and receive relevant authorization decisions from an AuthZEN-compatible PDP in an interoperable manner.¶
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.¶
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1.¶
Copyright (c) 2024 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.¶
OpenID AuthZEN is a Working Group under the OpenID Foundation which aims to increase interoperability and standardization in the authorization realm. In particular, AuthZEN aims to:¶
build standards-based authorization APIs¶
define standard design patterns for authorization¶
produce educational material to help raise awareness of externalized authorization.¶
The aim of this profile is to define an AuthZEN-conformant profile of the OAuth 2.0 Rich Authorization Requests [RFC9396]. [RFC9396] introduces a new parameter authorization_details
that allows clients to specify their fine-grained authorization requirements using the expressiveness of JSON [RFC8259] data structures.¶
This specification introduces a more structured format for the authorization_details
parameter. The new format is also JSON [RFC8259] as a result of which this specification is conformant with [RFC9396] and is merely a stricter profile.¶
For example the authorization request for a credit transfer mentioned in [RFC9396] would now be structured as follows¶
Using AuthZEN as a format for authorization_details
will increase the usability and the interoperability of [RFC9396]. In particular, it will be possible for the AS to forward the contents of the authorization_details
parameter to an AuthZEN-conformant Policy Decision Point (PDP).¶
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 the terms "access token", "refresh token", "authorization server" (AS), "resource server" (RS), "authorization endpoint", "authorization request", "authorization response", "token endpoint", "grant type", "access token request", "access token response", and "client" defined by "The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework" [RFC6749]. This specification uses the terms "PDP" and "PEP" defined by [ABAC] and [XACML].¶
The Security Considerations of [RFC9396], [RFC6749], [RFC7662], and [RFC8414] all apply.¶
This document has no IANA actions.¶
We would like to thank members of the OpenID AuthZEN Working Group for their valuable feedback during the preparation of this specification. In particular our thanks go to Gerry Gebel and Allan Foster.¶
We would also like to thank Justin Richer and Pieter Kasselman for their guidance on this spec and the overall IETF process.¶