Subject: [core] #189: Access control

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 20:05:37 -0000

#189: Access control

 From Richard Barnes:

 This document defines a format for describing a list of resources linked
 from a server, e.g., an HTTP or CoAP server.  The document suggests the
 use of TLS or DTLS on the underlying transport for transport security.  My
 only remaining security concern is that there could be access control
 concerns as well.  For example, a server might not authorize all clients
 to see all services, or might provide some clients with different levels
 of access (e.g., read vs. read/write).  The document already envisions
 that the list of links will have some dynamism, allowing for filtering
 based on link attributes.  I would suggest simply noting that servers may
 want to support HTTP, CoAP, or [D]TLS client authentication and adaptation
 of the list of returned links based on the client's identity and
 authorizations.

 Suggested text for Section 6:
 "
 Some servers may provide resource discovery services to a mix of clients
 that are trusted to different levels.  For example, a lighting control
 system might allow any client to read state variables, but only certain
 clients to write state (turn lights on or off).  Servers SHOULD support
 authentication features of the underlying transport protocols (HTTP, CoAP,
 or DTLS/TLS) and allow operators to return different lists of links based
 on a client's identity and authorization.
 "

-- 
----------------------------------+--------------------
 Reporter:  zach@…                |      Owner:  zach@…
     Type:  protocol enhancement  |     Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                 |  Milestone:
Component:  link-format           |    Version:
 Severity:  -                     |   Keywords:
----------------------------------+--------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/189>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>

---

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 22:05:19 -0000

#189: Access control

Comment (by cabo@…):

 Re the proposed text:
  * define "operators"
  * the SHOULD probably should be limited to servers that have
 authentication and authorization features in the first place.
  * authorization may differentiate between the privilege to see the
 existence of a resource and the privilege to read it

 ➔ "reflect their authorization features in what links are visible to a
 specific client based..."

-- 
----------------------------------+---------------------
 Reporter:  zach@…                |       Owner:  zach@…
     Type:  protocol enhancement  |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                 |   Milestone:
Component:  link-format           |     Version:
 Severity:  -                     |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                        |
----------------------------------+---------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/189#comment:1>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>