Difference between revisions of "JWT"

From MgmtWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Problems)
(Problems)
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
==Problems==
 
==Problems==
* The existing specs at the time the [[JWT]] was created were XML and SAML which were very wording and not amenable to coding in an HTTP header.
+
* The existing specs at the time the [[JWT]] was created were XML and [[SAML 2.0|SAML]] which were very wording and not amenable to coding in an HTTP header.
  
 
==Solutions==
 
==Solutions==

Revision as of 19:36, 28 May 2019

Full Title

JSON Web Token (JWT) -- pronounced "JOOT" as though it were Welsh.

Context

In OAuth 2.0 and other specs from the Open ID Foundation, there was a need for a small packed of identity information that could be coded and include in a HTTP header.

Problems

  • The existing specs at the time the JWT was created were XML and SAML which were very wording and not amenable to coding in an HTTP header.

Solutions

  • The RFC definition of the JSON Web Token (JWT). The abstract from the spec
    JSON Web Token (JWT) is a compact, URL-safe means of representing claims to be transferred between two parties. The claims in a JWT are encoded as a JSON object that is used as the payload of a JSON Web Signature (JWS) structure or as the plaintext of a JSON Web Encryption (JWE) structure, enabling the claims to be digitally signed or integrity protected with a Message Authentication Code (MAC) and/or encrypted.
  • Justin Richer has some suggestions.[1]

References

  1. RFC 6749 The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework specification
  2. RFC 8252 OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps Specification
    1. Justin Richer, Moving On from OAuth 2: A Proposal. https://medium.com/@justinsecurity/moving-on-from-oauth-2-629a00133ade