W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > May 2014

Re: Question about "TLS CCA Session" versus "Web Session"

From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 14:24:20 +0200
Message-ID: <5370BD74.6000005@gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
Melvin,

Of course you can use whatever "auth" method you feel suitable but that won't lead
to interoperability and then the market might as well continue using centralized
IdP schemes like Google.

That U2F is a suitable replacement for the (pretty much failed) WebID-TLS scheme
is something I wouldn't bet on.  The philosophy between U2F and WebID are quite
different.

Anders

On 2014-05-12 14:10, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12 May 2014 13:50, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2014-05-12 13:33, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>         On 5/12/14 6:00 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>
>             On 2014-05-12 10:57, henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>
>
>                 On 12 May 2014, at 09:32, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>__> wrote:
>
>                     On 2014-05-07 11:48, henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>
>                         On 7 May 2014, at 08:42, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>__> wrote:
>
>                             I don't claim knowing everything so please bear with me when I ask a simple question :-)
>
>                             Using JBoss and Tomcat (java-based) servers an HTTPS Client Certificate Authenticated
>                             session created from a browser *never terminates* regardless of session time-out settings
>                             because the TLS session has no link into the Java Servlet web session framework.
>
>                             Due to this neither manual logout or automatic logout work in such setups.
>
>                             Q1: how do other web-servers enforce logout from the server-side?
>                             Q2: if other web-servers actually can do this,  does this require TCP terminate?
>                             Q3: if other web-servers actually can do this,  logout works formost/all browsers without specific measures?
>
>                         As far as I can tell a server cannot force logout of the client, since the browsers tend to resend the same certificate
>                         to the server. You can only do this with Firefox which has a Javascript logout call currently. In my view login/logout
>                         has to be handled by the client in the chrome.
>
>
>                     This is a unique problem for HTTPS Client Certificate Authentication; no other authentication
>                     method needs modifications of the chrome in order to perform logout or requires the client
>                     to support session timeout policies.
>
>
>                 That is wrong as a little reflection should show:
>
>                 - Basic Authentication uses the Chrome
>
>
>             True.  However, basic auth is even less popular than HTTPS Client Cert Auth.
>             Form-based login rules on the web.
>
>
>                 - All other current methods rely on cookie based authentication, and it is problematic to exactly the extent that
>                     there until recently it was difficult for a user to control his cookie based personas. This is exactly what Aza Raskin
>                     was trying to bring into the Chrome with his "Identity in the Browser" blog post
>                 http://www.azarask.in/blog/__post/identity-in-the-browser-__firefox/ <http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/identity-in-the-browser-firefox/>
>
>
>             Fine with me.  If the mechanism is universal it would be a useful option.
>
>
>                     I can though imagine a chrome-based identity context but it should be optional and universal.
>                     It should probably also address logout to *all* enabled sites that you have encountered
>                     during your session on the web.
>
>
>                 yes, there are many such features that become possible once one starts thinking about tying
>                 identity to the Chrome, and putting the user fully in control of it. Google Chrome's Profiles
>                 are a good step in the direction, but they don't yet help show which certificates are used,
>
>
>             OK
>
>
>                 which  is important just because with WebID one could log into all sites with the same certificate.
>
>
>             In theory a singe certificate using WebID could log in to all sites but due to differences in
>             policies etc. this won't happen.  I don't see that as a problem if you have a working certificate
>             selection filter.
>
>
>             Question: where does this leave us?
>
>             Anders
>
>
>         Waiting for Chrome, Firefox, and Opera to catch up with IE (Windows) and  Safari (on Mac OS X, iOS). Now if you want to look at matters through "actual user" lenses, then the total users of IE and Safari completely trump the users of Firefox and Chrome, who for all intents are purposes fall into the "programmer / developer" user profile.
>
>         To conclude, most end-users don't even have a problem. They can work with <http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/__webid_demo.html <http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html>> and switch certificates without restarting their browsers. As for the issues with Certificate selection presentation, that's less of a problem when the Certificate Generator UI aids the user accordingly re., CN attribute values.
>
>         As is often the case, the programmer is making an incorrect assumption about end-users based on the programmers own preferred combination of host operating system, development tools, and test applications (e.g.,, browser in this case). Windows, Mac OS X, and iOS end-users don't have a problem because they use the default browsers provided by the OS.
>
>         If I have <http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/__webid_demo.html <http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html>> tweaked (which I will), such that it tests for Firefox/Mozilla, even users of that particular browser will be able to authenticate without restarting the browser -- since the HTML page served up from the server will include the necessary JS code achieving this goal.
>
>
>     This discusson doesn't go forward.
>
>     Google, Microsoft, PayPal and a lot of other big players recently
>     put their money on U2F which is completely new solution. There must be
>     reasons for not bulding on the already deployed platform, right?
>
>     Not until the WebID folks understand the motives behing the U2F we
>     can expect any progress in this space.
>
>
> WebID + U2F works too, there are many flavours.
>
> WebID + OpenID -- we have working demos of this
>
> WebID + Facebook Connect -- all facebook users have a WebID located at graph.facebook.com <http://graph.facebook.com> which server RDF/turtle
>
> WebID + cookie
>
> WebID + username / password
>
> WebID + OAuth
>
> WebID + TLS
>
> etc. etc.
>
> Just pick your favourite solution and use that.  If there isnt a bridge, build your own.  WebID + TLS is just for those that want to manage their keys on the client via X.509, until Web Crypto API comes out and offers more choice ...
>
>
>     Anders
>
>
>
>         --
>
>         Regards,
>
>         Kingsley Idehen
>         Founder & CEO
>         OpenLink Software
>         Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
>         Personal Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.__com/blog/~kidehen <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen>
>         Twitter Profile:https://twitter.com/__kidehen <https://twitter.com/kidehen>
>         Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.__com/+KingsleyIdehen/about <https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about>
>         LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.__com/in/kidehen <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 12 May 2014 12:24:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:05:55 UTC