# Contents of /trunk/projects/grid/sso/doc/SSOAuthMech.tex

Revision 3172 - (show annotations)
Fri Dec 4 11:08:17 2015 UTC (4 years, 8 months ago) by taffoni
File MIME type: application/x-tex
File size: 20611 byte(s)
SSO specification document


 1 \documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{ivoa} 2 \input tthdefs 3 4 \usepackage{listings} 5 %\lstloadlanguages{sh,make,xml,[latex]tex} 6 \lstset{flexiblecolumns=true,numberstyle=\small,showstringspaces=False, 7 identifierstyle=\texttt,defaultdialect=[latex]tex,language=tex} 8 9 10 \title{IVOA Single-Sign-On Profile: Authentication Mechanisms} 11 12 \ivoagroup{http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/IvoaGridAndWebServices} 13 14 %\author[????URL????]{http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/IvoaGridAndWebServices} 15 \author{Grid and Web Services Working Group} 16 17 \editor{Guy Rixon, Andre\'e Schaaff, Giuliano Taffoni 18 } 19 20 \previousversion{http://www.ivoa.net/documents/cover/SSOAuthMech-20080124.html 21 http://www.ivoa.net/documents/cover/SSOAuthMech-20070904.html 22 http://www.ivoa.net/documents/cover/SSOAuthMech-20070621.html 23 http://www.ivoa.net/documents/cover/SSOAuthMech-20060519.html 24 } 25 %\previousversion{This is the first public release} 26 27 28 \begin{document} 29 \begin{abstract} 30 Approved client-server authentication mechanisms are described for the IVOA single-sign-on profile: No Authentication; HTTP Basic Authentication; TLS with passwords; TLS with client certificates; Cookies; Open Authentication; Security Assertion Markup Language; OpenID. Normative rules are given for the implementation of these mechanisms, mainly by reference to pre-existing standards. The Authorization mechanisms are out of the scope of this document. 31 \end{abstract} 32 33 34 \section*{Acknowledgments} 35 36 This document derives from discussions among the Grid and Web Services working-group of IVOA. It is particularly informed by prototypes built by Matthew Graham (Caltech/US-NVO), Paul Harrison (ESO/EuroVO), David Morris (Cambridge/AstroGrid) and Raymond Plante (NCSA/US-NVO). The prior art for the use of proxy certificates comes from the Globus Alliance. 37 This document has been developed with support from the National Science Foundation's Information Technology Research Program under Cooperative Agreement AST0122449 with The Johns Hopkins University, from the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC) and from the Europena Commission's Sixth Framework Program via the Optical Infrared Coordination Network (OPTICON). 38 39 40 \section*{Conformance-related definitions} 41 The words MUST'', SHALL'', SHOULD'', MAY'', RECOMMENDED'', and 42 OPTIONAL'' (in upper or lower case) used in this document are to be 43 interpreted as described in IETF standard, \citet{std:RFC2119}. 44 45 The \emph{Virtual Observatory (VO)} is 46 general term for a collection of federated resources that can be used 47 to conduct astronomical research, education, and outreach. 48 The \href{http://www.ivoa.net}{International 49 Virtual Observatory Alliance (IVOA)} is a global 50 collaboration of separately funded projects to develop standards and 51 infrastructure that enable VO applications. 52 53 54 \section{Introduction} 55 IVOA's single-sign-on architecture is a system in which users assign cryptographic credentials to user agents so that the agents may act with the user?s identity and access rights. This standard describes how agents use those credentials to authenticate the user's identity in requests to services. This standard describes also the authentication mechanism of an application or a service making a call (on behalf of someone or something else) to an API or to another service 56 This document is essentially a {\em profile} against existing security standards; that is, it describes how an existing standard should be applied in an IVOA application to support single sign-on capabilities in the IVOA. In the following sections, we make specific references to details spelled out in these standards. For the purposes of validating against this standard, those referenced documents should be consulted for a full explanation of those details. Unfortunately, a reader that is unfamiliar with these external standards might find this specification confusing. To alleviate this problem, each major section is concluded by a Commentary subsection that provides some explanations of the detailed terms and concepts being referred to. The Commentary subsection may also provide recommended scenarios for how this specification might actually be realised. Note that the statements in the Commentary subsections are non-normative and should not be considered part of precise specification; nevertheless, they are indicative of the intended spirit of this document. 57 58 \subsection{Role within the VO Architecture} 59 60 \begin{figure} 61 \centering 62 63 % Get the architecture diagram from the TCG chair 64 65 % If they give you a PDF, for now dumb it down to a png by 66 % convert -antialias -density 72x72 archdiag.pdf archdiag.png 67 % Oh -- Notes don't need this; you'd have to remove archdiag.png 68 % from FIGURES in the Makefile, too. 69 \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{SSO_image001.png} 70 \caption{Architecture diagram for this document} 71 \label{fig:archdiag} 72 \end{figure} 73 74 Fig.~\ref{fig:archdiag} shows the role this document plays within the 75 IVOA architecture \citep{note:VOARCH}. 76 77 78 \section{Scope of this standard} 79 \subsection{Requirements} 80 When a service is registered in an IVOA registry, that services resource document may include metadata expressing conformance to one or more of the authentication mechanisms approved in the IVOA SSO profile. Such a service must implement those mechanisms as described in this document, and clients of the service must participate in the mechanism when calling the service. Is a service does not provide any SSO specification it is assumed that no authentication is required. 81 The registration of the service interface shall contain an XML element of type {\xmlel SecurityMethod} as specified in the XML schema for VOResource [VOResource]. The value of this element distinguished the authentication mechanism using the values stated in the sections below. 82 Services registered without the metadata alluded to above need not support any authentication mechanism. If they do require authentication, they may use either the IVOA-standard mechanisms or others that are not IVOA standards. 83 84 \subsection{Commentary} 85 The IVOA SSO profile allows the development of a ''realm'' of interoperable services and clients. 86 Service providers opt in to this realm by implementing this current standard and by registering accordingly in the IVOA registry. 87 This allows clients to discover a secured service through the registry and to be able to use it without 88 being customized for the details of the specific service. 89 90 Parts of the IVOA that are not intended to be widely interoperable need not opt in to the SSO realm. 91 In particular, ''private'' services, accessed by web browsers and protected by passwords, are allowed. 92 However, these private services should be reworked to follow the IVOA standard if they are later promoted to a wider audience. 93 94 An example of a registration for a secured interface follows. 95 \begin{lstlisting}[language=XML] 96 98 http://some.where/some/thing 99 ivo://ivoa.net/sso#saml2.0 100 101 \end{lstlisting} 102 103 More than one {\xmlel securityMethod} can be specified: 104 \begin{lstlisting}[language=XML] 105 107 http://some.where/some/thing 108 ivo://ivoa.net/sso#saml2.0 109 ivo://ivoa.net/sso#cookie 110 ivo://ivoa.net/sso#OpenID 111 112 \end{lstlisting} 113 114 The order identify the priority of the method to use, in the example above the preferred method to access 115 the service is {\em SAML}, than {cookies} and finally if the other are not available OpenID. 116 117 \section{Approved authentication mechanisms} 118 \subsection{Requirements} 119 The following authentication mechanisms are approved for use in the SSO profile. 120 \begin{itemize} 121 \item No authentication required. 122 \item HTTP Basic Authentication 123 \item Transport Layer Security (TLS) with passwords. 124 \item Transport Layer Security (TLS) with client certificates. 125 \item Cookies 126 \item Open Authentication (OAuth) 127 \item Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) 128 \item OpenID 129 \end{itemize} 130 131 The mechanism is associated with the interface provided by the service and registered in the IVOA registry. 132 133 \begin{table}[thm] \begin{tabular}{p{0.45\textwidth}p{0.64\textwidth}} \sptablerule 134 \textbf{SSO mechanism}&\textbf{\xmlel{}}\\ \sptablerule 135 No authentication required & none\\ 136 HTTP Basic Authentication & 137 \xmlel{http//www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/ 1.0/spec/html\#BasicAA}\\ 138 TLS with password & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#tls-with-password} \\ 139 TLS with client certificate & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#tls-with-certificate} \\ 140 Cookies & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#cookie} \\ 141 Open Authentication & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#OAuth} \\ 142 SAML & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#saml2.0} \\ 143 OpenID & \xmlel{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#OpenID} \\ 144 \sptablerule 145 \caption{List of approved authentication mechanisms and the corresponding securityMethod} 146 \label{table:SMtable} 147 \end{tabular} 148 \end{table} 149 150 Services that are registered with a IVOA registry as having a {em WebService} type interface 151 \citep{ivo:resource} shall support OAuth, or shall support cookies or shall support TLS with client 152 certificates or shall require no authentication. 153 Interfaces by which a user logs in to the SSO system shall support either 154 TLS with client certificates, or TLS with passwords, or SAML or a combination of the them 155 156 \section{HTTP Basic Authentication} 157 \subsection{Requirements} 158 Services using HTTP basic authentication shall use the authentication mechanism described in the RFC7235 \citep{std:RFC7235} 159 that updates RFC2617 \citep{std:RFC2617}. 160 Interfaces using this mechanism shall be be registered with the security method 161 162 \texttt{http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.0/spec/html\#BasicAA} 163 164 \subsection{Commentary} 165 HTTP provides a simple challenge-response authentication framework that can be used by a server to challenge 166 a client request and by a client to provide authentication information. 167 The HTTP authentication framework does not define a single mechanism for maintaining the confidentiality of credentials. 168 HTTP depends on the security properties of the underlying transport- or session-level connection to provide 169 confidential transmission of header fields. Connection secured with TLS are recommended prior to exchanging any credentials. 170 171 \section{Details of TLS} 172 \subsection{Requirements} 173 Services using Transport Layer Security (TLS) shall do so according to the TLS v1.2 standard RFC5246 \citep{std:RFC5246}. 174 175 \subsection{Commentary} 176 TLS supersedes the Secure Sockets Layer that is an outdated cryptographic protocol. 177 TLS v1.0 was based on SSL v3.0; the actual version of TLS is V1.2 described in by \citet{std:RFC5246}. 178 TLS v1.2 is back-compatible with TLS v1.0, TLS v1.1 and SSL v3.0. 179 TLS versions 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2, and SSL 3.0 are very similar, and use compatible ClientHello messages; 180 thus, supporting all of them is relatively easy.[...] TLS 1.2 clients that wish to support SSL 2.0 servers MUST 181 send version 2.0 CLIENT-HELLO messages defined in [SSL2].'' \citep{std:RFC5246}. 182 183 \section{Details of TLS-with-client-certificate} 184 \subsection{Requirements} 185 Certificates shall be transmitted and checked according to the TLS v1.2 standard [RFC5246]. 186 187 Services implementing TLS must support certificate chains including proxy certificates according to RFC6818 \citep{std:RFC6818}. 188 189 Interfaces using this mechanism shall be be registered with the security method \texttt{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#tls-with-client-certificate}. 190 191 \subsection{Commentary} 192 When Mutual Certificate Authentication is configured for REST services, both, the client and the service perform 193 identity verification or authentication through X.509 certificates. 194 195 The client authenticates the service during the initial SSL handshake, when the server sends the client a certificate to authenticate itself. 196 197 \section{Details of TLS-with-password} 198 \subsection{Requirements} 199 The user-name and password shall be passed in the message protected by the TLS mechanism, 200 not as part of the mechanism itself. The HTTP basic authentication'' should be used with particular attention. 201 202 Interfaces using this mechanism shall be be registered with the security method \texttt{ivo://ivoa.net/sso\#tls-with-password}. 203 204 \subsection{Commentary} 205 HTTP basic authentication'' passes the user-name and password in the HTTP headers, 206 assuming that the credentials are not a natural part of the message body. 207 This standard applies the TLS-with-Password mechanism only to the special case of logging in to the SSO realm. 208 Hence, the user name and password are logically part of the message body, not the message header. 209 210 \section{The use of Cookies} 211 \subsection{Requirements} 212 Cookie-Based Authentication uses server side cookies to authenticate the user on every request. 213 The way to manage cookies for authentication is described in RFC6265 \citep{std:RFC6265}. 214 215 \subsection{Commentary} 216 RESTful web services should use session-based authentication, either by establishing a session token via a POST or 217 by using an API key as a POST body argument or as a cookie. 218 User names, passwords, session tokens, and API keys should not appear in the URL, 219 as this can be captured in web server logs, which makes them intrinsically valuable. 220 \begin{figure} 221 \centering 222 \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{SSO_image002.png} 223 \caption{Simplified picture of SAML 2.0 authentication.} 224 \label{fig:saml} 225 \end{figure} 226 227 \section{Details on SAML authentication} 228 \subsection{Requirements} 229 Services using SAML authentication mechanisms shall shall do so according to the 230 saml-core-2.0-os OASIS standard \citep{std:SAML}. 231 SAML includes protocols and protocol bindings and security \citep{std:SAMLB}. 232 233 \subsection{Commentary} 234 SAML presumes two primary roles in any transaction: the organisation where the identity is established, 235 known as the Identity Provider (IdP''), or Asserting Party (AP''); 236 and the organisation which (for this transaction) wants to use this identity, known as the Service Provider (SP''), 237 or Relying Party (RP''). 238 239 A user attempts to access an application with the Service Provider. 240 The SP needs to establish the identity of this user, and so sends an authentication request to the Identity Provider. 241 242 The user authenticate with the IDP (IDP is taking care of the authentication mechanisms and protocols e.g. Kerberos, ldap etc.) so the IdP can send back an Assertion' to the SP. 243 Now the SP knows who the user is, and can process that user accordingly (see Fig.~\ref{fig:saml}). 244 \begin{figure} 245 \centering 246 \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{SSO_image003.png} 247 \caption{Simplified picture of OAuth 2.0 authentication.} 248 \label{fig:oauth} 249 \end{figure} 250 251 252 253 SAML2.0 allow also to service discovery mechanisms 254 255 \section{Details on OAuth} 256 \subsection{Requirements} 257 Services using OAuth authentication mechanisms shall do so according to the RFC6749 \citep{std:RFC6742}. 258 259 \subsection{Commentary} 260 Open Authentication 2.0 (also in conjunction with OpenID Connect) is actually the adopted standard 261 to handle identity in the framework of RESTful web services. 262 OAuth is used when an application is making a request on behalf of a user. 263 264 OAuth introduces the notion of an authorization token', a refresh token' and Authorization Service (AS). 265 The authorization' token states that the client application has the right to access services on the server (see Fig.~\ref{fig:oauth}). 266 However, it does not supersede any access control decisions that the server-side application might make. 267 268 OAuth is related to delegate credential from an application to another. 269 270 \section{Details on OpenID} 271 \subsection{Requirements} 272 Services using OpenID authentication mechanisms shall do so according to the OpenID Foundation standards \citep{std:openid} 273 274 \subsection{Commentary} 275 OpenID is an open and decentralized authentication and identity system. OpenID relying parties do not manage end user credentials 276 such as passwords or any other sensitive information which makes authentication and identity management much simpler and secure. 277 In a RESTful environment OpenID Connect \citep{std:openidconnect} is commonly adopted as authentication solution. OpenID Connect is a simple identity 278 layer on top of the OAuth 2.0 protocol, which allows computing clients to verify the identity of an end-user based on the authentication 279 performed by an authorization server, as well as to obtain basic profile information about the end-user in an interoperable and REST-like manner.'' \citep{std:openid}. 280 281 \appendix 282 \section{VOResource SecurityMethod extract} 283 284 \begin{lstlisting}[language=XSLT] 285 291 ... 292 ... 293 ... 294 ... 295 ... 296 ... 297 ... 298 ... 299 ... 300 ... 301 ... 302 ... 303 ... 304 ... 305 ... 306 ... 307 ... 308 ... 309 ... 310 ... 311 ... 312 ... 313 ... 314 ... 315 316 ... 317 318 ... 320 322 323 324 the mechanism the client must employ to gain secure access to the service. 325 326 327 when more than one method is listed, each one must be employed to gain access. 328 329 330 331 332 ... 333 ... 334 335 ... 336 337 338 a description of a security mechanism. 339 340 this type only allows one to refer to the mechanism via a URI. 341 Derived types would allow for more metadata. 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 A URI identifier for a standard security mechanism. 349 350 351 This provides a unique way to refer to a security specification standard. 352 The use of an IVOA identifier here implies that a VOResource 353 description of the standard is registered and accessible. 354 355 356 357 358 ... 359 ... 360 361 \end{lstlisting} 362 363 364 \section{Changes from Previous Versions} 365 366 367 \subsection {Changes from v. 1.01} 368 \begin{itemize} 369 \item We remove all the references to SOAP as deprecated from IVOA 370 \item We add new security methods ad relative discussion sessions: OpenID, SAML, Cookies, HTTP basic authentication 371 \end{itemize} 372 373 374 \bibliography{ivoatex/ivoabib,SSOAuthMech} 375 376 377 \end{document}

 msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de ViewVC Help Powered by ViewVC 1.1.26