-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
FAPI_Meeting_Notes_2023 09 06_Atlantic
Nat Sakimura edited this page Jul 10, 2026
·
1 revision
- Date & Time: 2023-09-06 14:00 UTC
- Location: https://zoom.us/j/97456084642?pwd=bTRFVzk4ZmlRK1M3bEprRlN5c3JFZz09
Agenda
The meeting was called to order at 14:03 UTC.
- Attendees: Nat, Joseph, George, Aaron, Bjorn, Brian, Craig, Daniel, Dave, Dima, Justin, Kosuke, Mark
- Regrets:
- Adopted as is.
OIDF planning workshop prior to IIW on Oct 9 at Cisco in Mountain View, California. Need to register 1 week before the workshop.
Link: https://openid.net/registration-workshop-october-9-2023/
- Coming up with FAPI CIBA Profile.
TAB recordings are available if you sign up to their discord.
-
- PR 429 - fixes #527 - Create security note/consideration on B. Access Token Injection
-
- https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/429
- Merged but opened a related ticket.
-
- PR 431 - Proposal to fix Issue #605
-
- https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/431
- Waiting for Taka's approval
-
- #610 Review FAPI1 security considerations for clarity
-
- Make sure that not all security considerations need to be implemented.
-
- #495 Certification: Requirements for alg support in RPs/OPs
-
- concluded not to make the jws algorithm part of the profile matrix at all, same as it wasn’t part of the matrix in FAPI1.
- This is more for vendor product certification - if folks have ideas, it will be welcome but this ticket is being closed.
-
- #607 Authentication property of FAPI 2.0
-
- Daniel suggests that it would be a functional property.
- It might be good to point it out in the implementation guidance.
- Nat to come back to it after refreshing memory.
-
- #605 Security issue in the JWT Response for OAuth Token Introspection specification
-
- No discussion
-
- #606 Certification/conformance: Strictness of checking error responses
-
- 40x response checking in particular from PAR endpoint.
- A screenshot in the certification request would suffice.
- To be closed.
-
- #590 "Client" is misleading in the context of signed introspection responses
-
- Taka pointed out that it is linked to #605.
- Once Daniel's PR is approved, it should be resolved.
- The PR: https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/431
-
- #457 Create JSON Schema for Grant Management Specification
-
- Grant management did not get adopted by AU so it has no time pressure.
- To be kept in our backlog.
-
- #591 Require servers to allow for clock skew
-
- At least 10 sec, but not more that 60 sec.
- George: How does a client know it failed due to clock skew? Being specific may limit the applicability.
- Joseph: Lower bound was introduced to testable.
- George: Would it not be better to make it a conformance testing requirement and not normative?
- Joseph: That would confuse people.
- George: Depending on the risk environment and functional protocols, we may want to further lockdown or relax.
- Joseph: Lowerbound as "shall" and upperbound as "should"?
- George: With a security consideration, pointing out the possibility of changing the bounds, OK.
- Brian: For time-syncing, we can use nonce in DPOP.
- n/a
The meeting adjourned at 15:00.