- From: John Bradley <jbradley@yubico.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 20:41:57 -0500
- To: Marius Scurtescu <marius.scurtescu@coinbase.com>
- Cc: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>, W3C Web Authn WG <public-webauthn@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAEY7Pj8KQDBELnPxrUNWVHsMhNQQw8tjKT66ZgCKu8MhHAjRVw@mail.gmail.com>
There was an effort to simplify the spec. FacitID was a victim of that. Dirk can fill in the details. The payments people are wanting the iframe solution, for 3dsecure and open banking. I think we do need a way to delegate domain A to act as a proxy for domain B. I would prefer to do it in a more granular way than was done in FacitID. Some of us kicked some ideas around at the last Fido plenery. I think it could be done in WebAuthn with existing CTAP2 authenticators. John B. On Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:50 PM Marius Scurtescu < marius.scurtescu@coinbase.com> wrote: > Thanks again Adam. > > Is this the iframe spec you are referring to: > https://www.w3.org/TR/webauthn-2/#sctn-iframe-guidance > > The situation looks pretty bleak from where I stand. I am surprised that > this is not coming up as an issue. Was there a concrete reason to stop > supporting FacetID? Lack of interest? > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:59 PM Adam Langley <agl@google.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:08 PM Marius Scurtescu < >> marius.scurtescu@coinbase.com> wrote: >> >>> How is a multi-domain deployment supposed to work with WebAuthn? And by >>> multi-domain I mean domains that don't match: example1.com and >>> example2.com. >>> >>> One solution that was suggested is to always redirect to the IdP, so >>> there is not need for multiple domains. That might work for login, but when >>> WebAuthn is used as a re-authentication challenge then a full page redirect >>> becomes very difficult to implement, especially for an existing application. >>> >> >> WebAuthn credentials are tied to an RP ID, which is a domain name. There >> is not support for “groups” of domains being acceptable for a credential. >> >> Redirecting (with suitable care) is possible, somewhat similar to OAuth. >> There is also (currently) unimplemented spec for granting iframes WebAuthn >> abilities, in which case postMessage can be used. Implementation priorities >> are set by need and, currently, nobody is making a fuss about the lack of >> iframe support so it's not on the roadmap. >> >> >> Cheers >> >> AGL >> >
Received on Friday, 19 July 2019 01:42:35 UTC