PRC-1: UserInfo Request Topic #5
Replies: 7 comments
-
|
This looks great, and I appreciate that it draws from the work of existing standards like OpenID Connect as inspiration. On the open questions:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For now, the advantages of unsigned request types are:
There are also some request types where wrapping their results in a signature would be redundant, e.g.
Yeah I agree with that! Perhaps the more precise choice is between |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Note: I edited this discussion to replace |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
What are the advantages of using net.opened.userinfo? Is the primary benefit standardizing the nomenclature around an existing protocol? Would using OpenID’s specs standardizes those fields and then Pass Providers would specify additional fields through Pass Request topics? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
OpenID Connect is a pretty well-adopted spec around exchanging common
profile fields between apps, and so you’re right that’s the primary
benefit.
This RFC provides a simple way to request profile fields by standing on the
shoulders of OIDC claims.
That said, OIDC claims limit user profile fields to a pretty primitive set,
and Passes is capable of much more, so this RFC is really just a starting
point.
…On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 9:49 PM Jay Scambler ***@***.***> wrote:
What are the advantages of using net.opened.userinfo? Is the primary
benefit standardizing the nomenclature around an existing protocol?
Would using OpenID’s specs standardizes those fields and then Pass
Providers would specify additional fields through Pass Request topics?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#5 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMQES7GDUURDF26HZEBENTYQHBZXAVCNFSM6AAAAABALXHJTWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43SRDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHM4DEMZZHEZDA>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The use cases that I'm imagining where Passes would be particularly helpful are definitely outside the scope of fields within the OIDC claims, so I think it's appropriate to go with org.passes.userinfo for the topic id. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Update: This proposal has been updated to rename the topic to Application-related request topics will instead use the namespace of the application that proposes them. For example, because Genesis ( This change helps standards to evolve without central coordination around Passes.org or this discussions site, enabling things to progress more easily and quickly. This discussion will now be closed. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
2024-02-06 Update
This proposal has been updated to rename the topic to
xyz.genesis.oidc.userinfoto reflect the convention that has emerged where the only request topics related to features of the Passes protocol, such asorg.passes.provide-pass,org.passes.provide-topics,org.passes.request-batch, andorg.passes.request-with-default-provideruse theorg.passes.*namespace.Application-related request topics will instead use the namespace of the application that proposes them. For example, because Genesis (https://genesis.xyz) is proposing this request, it belongs in the
xyz.genesis.*namespace.This change helps standards to evolve without central coordination around Passes.org or this discussions site, enabling things to progress more easily and quickly.
This discussion will now be closed.
Simple Summary
A Pass Request Topic for requesting user info.
Abstract
This is a standards proposal for a Pass Request Topic that allows apps to request user information. It proposes requesting a set of OpenID Connect (OIDC) Standard Claims via JSON
ClaimKey[], and receiving a JSONRecord<ClaimKey, Value>as a result.The proposed topic
xyz.genesis.oidc.userinfogets its name from the OIDC Spec's UserInfo Request.Motivation
A standard pass request topic for user info allows apps to request a known set of user information from pass providers.
Specification
xyz.genesis.oidc.userinfoExamples
Open Questions
Topic? Is the topic IDorg.passes.userinfoappropriate? Should it instead be something likeorg.passes.prc-1ornet.openid.userinfo?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions