Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 13, 2022. It is now read-only.

Epic: Re-write scope handling #3520

Closed
leastprivilege opened this issue Aug 5, 2019 · 6 comments
Closed

Epic: Re-write scope handling #3520

leastprivilege opened this issue Aug 5, 2019 · 6 comments
Assignees
@brockallen
Labels
breaking change pinned

Comments

@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member

leastprivilege commented Aug 5, 2019 •
edited

More flexible scope validation

  • dynamic scopes?
  • structured scopes?
  • claims parameter in request object
  • ignore unknown scopes?
  • consider default resource scopes also for authorize endpoint (similar to token endpoint)

Evaluate resource indicator spec

  • could work with current resource/scope model

related

#2737
#2763
#3245
@leastprivilege leastprivilege added this to the 4.0 milestone Aug 5, 2019
This was referenced Aug 5, 2019
Closed
Closed
Closed
@leastprivilege leastprivilege mentioned this issue Oct 6, 2019
Closed
@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member Author

Also: related to resource indicators

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-resource-indicators-08

which is now in the queue to become an RFC

@leastprivilege leastprivilege mentioned this issue Oct 22, 2019
Closed
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jan 10, 2020

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the wontfix label Jan 10, 2020
@stale stale bot removed the wontfix label Jan 10, 2020
@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member Author

Plan is to allow duplicate scope names - because there are scenarios where this makes sense.

But for most scenarios this is just a config bug. We need to add a config switch to validate that.

@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member Author

#3958

@brockallen brockallen removed this from the 4.0 milestone Mar 24, 2020
@brockallen brockallen mentioned this issue Mar 24, 2020
Merged
@brockallen
Copy link
Member

PR submitted.

@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Apr 25, 2020

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 25, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees

@brockallen brockallen

Labels
breaking change pinned
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@brockallen @leastprivilege