| draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-20.txt |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-21.txt |
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
| HTTPbis Working Group R. Fielding, Ed. |  | HTTPbis Working Group R. Fielding, Ed. |
| Internet-Draft Adobe |  | Internet-Draft Adobe |
| Obsoletes: 2616 (if approved) Y. Lafon, Ed. |  | Obsoletes: 2616 (if approved) J. Reschke, Ed. |
| Updates: 2617 (if approved) W3C |  | Updates: 2617 (if approved) greenbytes |
| Intended status: Standards Track J. Reschke, Ed. |  | Intended status: Standards Track October 4, 2012 |
| Expires: January 17, 2013 greenbytes |  | Expires: April 7, 2013 |
| July 16, 2012 |  |  |
| HTTP/1.1, part 7: Authentication |  | Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication |
| draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-20 |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-21 |
| Abstract |  | Abstract |
| The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level |  | The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level |
| protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information |  | protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypermedia information |
| systems. This document defines the HTTP Authentication framework. |  | systems. This document defines the HTTP Authentication framework. |
| Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) |  | Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor) |
| Discussion of this draft takes place on the HTTPBIS working group |  | Discussion of this draft takes place on the HTTPBIS working group |
| mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org), which is archived at |  | mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org), which is archived at |
| <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/>. |  | <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/>. |
| The current issues list is at |  | The current issues list is at |
| <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/3> and related |  | <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/3> and related |
| documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at |  | documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at |
| <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/>. |  | <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/>. |
| The changes in this draft are summarized in Appendix D.1. |  | The changes in this draft are summarized in Appendix D.2. |
| Status of This Memo |  | Status of This Memo |
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the |  | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the |
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. |  | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. |
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering |  | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering |
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute |  | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute |
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- |  | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- |
| Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. |  | Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. |
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months |  | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months |
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any |  | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any |
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference |  | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference |
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." |  | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." |
| This Internet-Draft will expire on January 17, 2013. |  | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 7, 2013. |
| Copyright Notice |  | Copyright Notice |
| Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the |  | Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the |
| document authors. All rights reserved. |  | document authors. All rights reserved. |
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal |  | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal |
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents |  | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents |
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of |  | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of |
| publication of this document. Please review these documents |  | publication of this document. Please review these documents |
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect |  | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect |
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must |  | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must |
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of |  | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of |
| skipping to change at page 3, line 9 |  | skipping to change at page 3, line 9 |
| the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified |  | the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified |
| outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may |  | outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may |
| not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format |  | not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format |
| it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other |  | it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other |
| than English. |  | than English. |
| Table of Contents |  | Table of Contents |
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |  | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |
| 1.1. Conformance and Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |  | 1.1. Conformance and Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |
| 1.2. Syntax Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 |  | 1.2. Syntax Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |
| 2. Access Authentication Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 |  | 2. Access Authentication Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |
| 2.1. Challenge and Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 |  | 2.1. Challenge and Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 |
| 2.2. Protection Space (Realm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 |  | 2.2. Protection Space (Realm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 |
| 2.3. Authentication Scheme Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 |  | 2.3. Authentication Scheme Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 |
| 2.3.1. Considerations for New Authentication Schemes . . . . 8 |  | 2.3.1. Considerations for New Authentication Schemes . . . . 7 |
| 3. Status Code Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |  | 3. Status Code Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |
| 3.1. 401 Unauthorized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |  | 3.1. 401 Unauthorized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |
| 3.2. 407 Proxy Authentication Required . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 |  | 3.2. 407 Proxy Authentication Required . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |
| 4. Header Field Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 |  | 4. Header Field Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |
| 4.1. Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 |  | 4.1. Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 |
| 4.2. Proxy-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 |  | 4.2. Proxy-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 |
| 4.3. Proxy-Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 |  | 4.3. Proxy-Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 |
| 4.4. WWW-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |  | 4.4. WWW-Authenticate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 |
| 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |  | 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |
| 5.1. Authentication Scheme Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |  | 5.1. Authentication Scheme Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |
| 5.2. Status Code Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 |  | 5.2. Status Code Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |
| 5.3. Header Field Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 |  | 5.3. Header Field Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |
| 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 |  | 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 |
| 6.1. Authentication Credentials and Idle Clients . . . . . . . 13 |  | 6.1. Authentication Credentials and Idle Clients . . . . . . . 13 |
| 6.2. Protection Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 |  | 6.2. Protection Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 |
| 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 |  | 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 |
| 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 |  | 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 |
| 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 |  | 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 |
| 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 |  | 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 |
| Appendix A. Changes from RFCs 2616 and 2617 . . . . . . . . . . . 16 |  | Appendix A. Changes from RFCs 2616 and 2617 . . . . . . . . . . . 15 |
| Appendix B. Imported ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 |  | Appendix B. Imported ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 |
| Appendix C. Collected ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 |  | Appendix C. Collected ABNF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 |
| Appendix D. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before |  | Appendix D. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before |
| publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 |  | publication) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 |
| D.1. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19 . . . . . . . . . . . 17 |  | D.1. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19 . . . . . . . . . . . 16 |
| Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 |  | D.2. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-20 . . . . . . . . . . . 17 |
|  |  | Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 |
| 1. Introduction |  | 1. Introduction |
| This document defines HTTP/1.1 access control and authentication. It |  | This document defines HTTP/1.1 access control and authentication. It |
| includes the relevant parts of RFC 2616 with only minor changes |  | includes the relevant parts of RFC 2616 with only minor changes |
| ([RFC2616]), plus the general framework for HTTP authentication, as |  | ([RFC2616]), plus the general framework for HTTP authentication, as |
| previously defined in "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access |  | previously defined in "HTTP Authentication: Basic and Digest Access |
| Authentication" ([RFC2617]). |  | Authentication" ([RFC2617]). |
| HTTP provides several OPTIONAL challenge-response authentication |  | HTTP provides several OPTIONAL challenge-response authentication |
| skipping to change at page 4, line 25 |  | skipping to change at page 4, line 25 |
| request and by a client to provide authentication information. The |  | request and by a client to provide authentication information. The |
| "basic" and "digest" authentication schemes continue to be specified |  | "basic" and "digest" authentication schemes continue to be specified |
| in RFC 2617. |  | in RFC 2617. |
| 1.1. Conformance and Error Handling |  | 1.1. Conformance and Error Handling |
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", |  | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", |
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this |  | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this |
| document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. |  | document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. |
| This specification targets conformance criteria according to the role |  | Conformance criteria and considerations regarding error handling are |
| of a participant in HTTP communication. Hence, HTTP requirements are |  | defined in Section 2.5 of [Part1]. |
| placed on senders, recipients, clients, servers, user agents, |  |  |
| intermediaries, origin servers, proxies, gateways, or caches, |  |  |
| depending on what behavior is being constrained by the requirement. |  |  |
| See Section 2 of [Part1] for definitions of these terms. |  |  |
| The verb "generate" is used instead of "send" where a requirement |  |  |
| differentiates between creating a protocol element and merely |  |  |
| forwarding a received element downstream. |  |  |
| An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of |  |  |
| the requirements associated with the roles it partakes in HTTP. Note |  |  |
| that SHOULD-level requirements are relevant here, unless one of the |  |  |
| documented exceptions is applicable. |  |  |
| This document also uses ABNF to define valid protocol elements |  |  |
| (Section 1.2). In addition to the prose requirements placed upon |  |  |
| them, senders MUST NOT generate protocol elements that do not match |  |  |
| the grammar defined by the ABNF rules for those protocol elements |  |  |
| that are applicable to the sender's role. If a received protocol |  |  |
| element is processed, the recipient MUST be able to parse any value |  |  |
| that would match the ABNF rules for that protocol element, excluding |  |  |
| only those rules not applicable to the recipient's role. |  |  |
| Unless noted otherwise, a recipient MAY attempt to recover a usable |  |  |
| protocol element from an invalid construct. HTTP does not define |  |  |
| specific error handling mechanisms except when they have a direct |  |  |
| impact on security, since different applications of the protocol |  |  |
| require different error handling strategies. For example, a Web |  |  |
| browser might wish to transparently recover from a response where the |  |  |
| Location header field doesn't parse according to the ABNF, whereas a |  |  |
| systems control client might consider any form of error recovery to |  |  |
| be dangerous. |  |  |
| 1.2. Syntax Notation |  | 1.2. Syntax Notation |
| This specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) |  | This specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) |
| notation of [RFC5234] with the list rule extension defined in Section |  | notation of [RFC5234] with the list rule extension defined in Section |
| 1.2 of [Part1]. Appendix B describes rules imported from other |  | 1.2 of [Part1]. Appendix B describes rules imported from other |
| documents. Appendix C shows the collected ABNF with the list rule |  | documents. Appendix C shows the collected ABNF with the list rule |
| expanded. |  | expanded. |
| 2. Access Authentication Framework |  | 2. Access Authentication Framework |
| skipping to change at page 5, line 40 |  | skipping to change at page 5, line 9 |
| capable of holding base64-encoded information. |  | capable of holding base64-encoded information. |
| Parameters are name-value pairs where the name is matched case- |  | Parameters are name-value pairs where the name is matched case- |
| insensitively, and each parameter name MUST only occur once per |  | insensitively, and each parameter name MUST only occur once per |
| challenge. |  | challenge. |
| auth-scheme = token |  | auth-scheme = token |
| auth-param = token BWS "=" BWS ( token / quoted-string ) |  | auth-param = token BWS "=" BWS ( token / quoted-string ) |
| b64token = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / |  | token68 = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / |
| "-" / "." / "_" / "~" / "+" / "/" ) *"=" |  | "-" / "." / "_" / "~" / "+" / "/" ) *"=" |
| The "b64token" syntax allows the 66 unreserved URI characters |  | The "token68" syntax allows the 66 unreserved URI characters |
| ([RFC3986]), plus a few others, so that it can hold a base64, |  | ([RFC3986]), plus a few others, so that it can hold a base64, |
| base64url (URL and filename safe alphabet), base32, or base16 (hex) |  | base64url (URL and filename safe alphabet), base32, or base16 (hex) |
| encoding, with or without padding, but excluding whitespace |  | encoding, with or without padding, but excluding whitespace |
| ([RFC4648]). |  | ([RFC4648]). |
| The 401 (Unauthorized) response message is used by an origin server |  | The 401 (Unauthorized) response message is used by an origin server |
| to challenge the authorization of a user agent. This response MUST |  | to challenge the authorization of a user agent. This response MUST |
| include a WWW-Authenticate header field containing at least one |  | include a WWW-Authenticate header field containing at least one |
| challenge applicable to the requested resource. |  | challenge applicable to the requested resource. |
| The 407 (Proxy Authentication Required) response message is used by a |  | The 407 (Proxy Authentication Required) response message is used by a |
| proxy to challenge the authorization of a client and MUST include a |  | proxy to challenge the authorization of a client and MUST include a |
| Proxy-Authenticate header field containing at least one challenge |  | Proxy-Authenticate header field containing at least one challenge |
| applicable to the proxy for the requested resource. |  | applicable to the proxy for the requested resource. |
| challenge = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( b64token / #auth-param ) ] |  | challenge = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( token68 / #auth-param ) ] |
| Note: User agents will need to take special care in parsing the |  | Note: User agents will need to take special care in parsing the |
| WWW-Authenticate and Proxy-Authenticate header field values |  | WWW-Authenticate and Proxy-Authenticate header field values |
| because they can contain more than one challenge, or if more than |  | because they can contain more than one challenge, or if more than |
| one of each is provided, since the contents of a challenge can |  | one of each is provided, since the contents of a challenge can |
| itself contain a comma-separated list of authentication |  | itself contain a comma-separated list of authentication |
| parameters. |  | parameters. |
| Note: Many clients fail to parse challenges containing unknown |  | Note: Many clients fail to parse challenges containing unknown |
| schemes. A workaround for this problem is to list well-supported |  | schemes. A workaround for this problem is to list well-supported |
| skipping to change at page 6, line 42 |  | skipping to change at page 6, line 10 |
| field with the request. |  | field with the request. |
| Both the Authorization field value and the Proxy-Authorization field |  | Both the Authorization field value and the Proxy-Authorization field |
| value contain the client's credentials for the realm of the resource |  | value contain the client's credentials for the realm of the resource |
| being requested, based upon a challenge received from the server |  | being requested, based upon a challenge received from the server |
| (possibly at some point in the past). When creating their values, |  | (possibly at some point in the past). When creating their values, |
| the user agent ought to do so by selecting the challenge with what it |  | the user agent ought to do so by selecting the challenge with what it |
| considers to be the most secure auth-scheme that it understands, |  | considers to be the most secure auth-scheme that it understands, |
| obtaining credentials from the user as appropriate. |  | obtaining credentials from the user as appropriate. |
| credentials = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( b64token / #auth-param ) ] |  | credentials = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( token68 / #auth-param ) ] |
| Upon a request for a protected resource that omits credentials, |  | Upon a request for a protected resource that omits credentials, |
| contains invalid credentials (e.g., a bad password) or partial |  | contains invalid credentials (e.g., a bad password) or partial |
| credentials (e.g., when the authentication scheme requires more than |  | credentials (e.g., when the authentication scheme requires more than |
| one round trip), an origin server SHOULD return a 401 (Unauthorized) |  | one round trip), an origin server SHOULD return a 401 (Unauthorized) |
| response. Such responses MUST include a WWW-Authenticate header |  | response. Such responses MUST include a WWW-Authenticate header |
| field containing at least one (possibly new) challenge applicable to |  | field containing at least one (possibly new) challenge applicable to |
| the requested resource. |  | the requested resource. |
| Likewise, upon a request that requires authentication by proxies that |  | Likewise, upon a request that requires authentication by proxies that |
| omit credentials or contain invalid or partial credentials, a proxy |  | omit credentials or contain invalid or partial credentials, a proxy |
| SHOULD return a 407 (Proxy Authentication Required) response. Such |  | SHOULD return a 407 (Proxy Authentication Required) response. Such |
| responses MUST include a Proxy-Authenticate header field containing a |  | responses MUST include a Proxy-Authenticate header field containing a |
| (possibly new) challenge applicable to the proxy. |  | (possibly new) challenge applicable to the proxy. |
| A server receiving credentials that are valid, but not adequate to |  | A server receiving credentials that are valid, but not adequate to |
| gain access, ought to respond with the 403 (Forbidden) status code |  | gain access, ought to respond with the 403 (Forbidden) status code |
| (Section 4.6.3 of [Part2]). |  | (Section 7.5.3 of [Part2]). |
| The HTTP protocol does not restrict applications to this simple |  | The HTTP protocol does not restrict applications to this simple |
| challenge-response mechanism for access authentication. Additional |  | challenge-response mechanism for access authentication. Additional |
| mechanisms MAY be used, such as encryption at the transport level or |  | mechanisms MAY be used, such as encryption at the transport level or |
| via message encapsulation, and with additional header fields |  | via message encapsulation, and with additional header fields |
| specifying authentication information. However, such additional |  | specifying authentication information. However, such additional |
| mechanisms are not defined by this specification. |  | mechanisms are not defined by this specification. |
| Proxies MUST forward the WWW-Authenticate and Authorization header |  | Proxies MUST forward the WWW-Authenticate and Authorization header |
| fields unmodified and follow the rules found in Section 4.1. |  | fields unmodified and follow the rules found in Section 4.1. |
| skipping to change at page 8, line 36 |  | skipping to change at page 8, line 4 |
| There are certain aspects of the HTTP Authentication Framework that |  | There are certain aspects of the HTTP Authentication Framework that |
| put constraints on how new authentication schemes can work: |  | put constraints on how new authentication schemes can work: |
| o HTTP authentication is presumed to be stateless: all of the |  | o HTTP authentication is presumed to be stateless: all of the |
| information necessary to authenticate a request MUST be provided |  | information necessary to authenticate a request MUST be provided |
| in the request, rather than be dependent on the server remembering |  | in the request, rather than be dependent on the server remembering |
| prior requests. Authentication based on, or bound to, the |  | prior requests. Authentication based on, or bound to, the |
| underlying connection is outside the scope of this specification |  | underlying connection is outside the scope of this specification |
| and inherently flawed unless steps are taken to ensure that the |  | and inherently flawed unless steps are taken to ensure that the |
| connection cannot be used by any party other than the |  | connection cannot be used by any party other than the |
| authenticated user (see Section 2.4 of [Part1]). |  | authenticated user (see Section 2.3 of [Part1]). |
| o The authentication parameter "realm" is reserved for defining |  | o The authentication parameter "realm" is reserved for defining |
| Protection Spaces as defined in Section 2.2. New schemes MUST NOT |  | Protection Spaces as defined in Section 2.2. New schemes MUST NOT |
| use it in a way incompatible with that definition. |  | use it in a way incompatible with that definition. |
| o The "b64token" notation was introduced for compatibility with |  | o The "token68" notation was introduced for compatibility with |
| existing authentication schemes and can only be used once per |  | existing authentication schemes and can only be used once per |
| challenge/credentials. New schemes thus ought to use the "auth- |  | challenge/credentials. New schemes thus ought to use the "auth- |
| param" syntax instead, because otherwise future extensions will be |  | param" syntax instead, because otherwise future extensions will be |
| impossible. |  | impossible. |
| o The parsing of challenges and credentials is defined by this |  | o The parsing of challenges and credentials is defined by this |
| specification, and cannot be modified by new authentication |  | specification, and cannot be modified by new authentication |
| schemes. When the auth-param syntax is used, all parameters ought |  | schemes. When the auth-param syntax is used, all parameters ought |
| to support both token and quoted-string syntax, and syntactical |  | to support both token and quoted-string syntax, and syntactical |
| constraints ought to be defined on the field value after parsing |  | constraints ought to be defined on the field value after parsing |
| skipping to change at page 14, line 44 |  | skipping to change at page 14, line 4 |
| Possible mitigation strategies include restricting direct access to |  | Possible mitigation strategies include restricting direct access to |
| authentication credentials (i.e., not making the content of the |  | authentication credentials (i.e., not making the content of the |
| Authorization request header field available), and separating |  | Authorization request header field available), and separating |
| protection spaces by using a different host name for each party. |  | protection spaces by using a different host name for each party. |
| 7. Acknowledgments |  | 7. Acknowledgments |
| This specification takes over the definition of the HTTP |  | This specification takes over the definition of the HTTP |
| Authentication Framework, previously defined in RFC 2617. We thank |  | Authentication Framework, previously defined in RFC 2617. We thank |
| John Franks, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker, Jeffery L. Hostetler, Scott D. |  | John Franks, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker, Jeffery L. Hostetler, Scott D. |
| Lawrence, Paul J. Leach, Ari Luotonen, and Lawrence C. Stewart for |  | Lawrence, Paul J. Leach, Ari Luotonen, and Lawrence C. Stewart for |
| their work on that specification. See Section 6 of [RFC2617] for |  | their work on that specification. See Section 6 of [RFC2617] for |
| further acknowledgements. |  | further acknowledgements. |
| See Section 9 of [Part1] for the Acknowledgments related to this |  | See Section 9 of [Part1] for the Acknowledgments related to this |
| document revision. |  | document revision. |
| 8. References |  | 8. References |
| 8.1. Normative References |  | 8.1. Normative References |
| [Part1] Fielding, R., Ed., Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., |  | [Part1] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer |
| "HTTP/1.1, part 1: Message Routing and Syntax"", |  | Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", |
| draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-20 (work in progress), |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-21 (work in progress), |
| July 2012. |  | October 2012. |
| [Part2] Fielding, R., Ed., Lafon, Y., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., |  | [Part2] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer |
| "HTTP/1.1, part 2: Semantics and Payloads", |  | Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", |
| draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-20 (work in progress), |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-21 (work in progress), |
| July 2012. |  | October 2012. |
| [Part6] Fielding, R., Ed., Lafon, Y., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., |  | [Part6] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke, |
| and J. Reschke, Ed., "HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching", |  | Ed., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", |
| draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-20 (work in progress), |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-21 (work in progress), |
| July 2012. |  | October 2012. |
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate |  | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate |
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |  | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
| [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax |  | [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax |
| Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. |  | Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. |
| 8.2. Informative References |  | 8.2. Informative References |
| [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., |  | [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., |
| skipping to change at page 16, line 11 |  | skipping to change at page 15, line 20 |
| [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an |  | [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an |
| IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, |  | IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, |
| May 2008. |  | May 2008. |
| Appendix A. Changes from RFCs 2616 and 2617 |  | Appendix A. Changes from RFCs 2616 and 2617 |
| The "realm" parameter isn't required anymore in general; |  | The "realm" parameter isn't required anymore in general; |
| consequently, the ABNF allows challenges without any auth parameters. |  | consequently, the ABNF allows challenges without any auth parameters. |
| (Section 2) |  | (Section 2) |
| The "b64token" alternative to auth-param lists has been added for |  | The "token68" alternative to auth-param lists has been added for |
| consistency with legacy authentication schemes such as "Basic". |  | consistency with legacy authentication schemes such as "Basic". |
| (Section 2) |  | (Section 2) |
| Introduce Authentication Scheme Registry. (Section 2.3) |  | Introduce Authentication Scheme Registry. (Section 2.3) |
| Change ABNF productions for header fields to only define the field |  |  |
| value. (Section 4) |  |  |
| Appendix B. Imported ABNF |  | Appendix B. Imported ABNF |
| The following core rules are included by reference, as defined in |  | The following core rules are included by reference, as defined in |
| Appendix B.1 of [RFC5234]: ALPHA (letters), CR (carriage return), |  | Appendix B.1 of [RFC5234]: ALPHA (letters), CR (carriage return), |
| CRLF (CR LF), CTL (controls), DIGIT (decimal 0-9), DQUOTE (double |  | CRLF (CR LF), CTL (controls), DIGIT (decimal 0-9), DQUOTE (double |
| quote), HEXDIG (hexadecimal 0-9/A-F/a-f), LF (line feed), OCTET (any |  | quote), HEXDIG (hexadecimal 0-9/A-F/a-f), LF (line feed), OCTET (any |
| 8-bit sequence of data), SP (space), and VCHAR (any visible US-ASCII |  | 8-bit sequence of data), SP (space), and VCHAR (any visible US-ASCII |
| character). |  | character). |
| The rules below are defined in [Part1]: |  | The rules below are defined in [Part1]: |
| skipping to change at page 17, line 23 |  | skipping to change at page 16, line 23 |
| Proxy-Authenticate = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS |  | Proxy-Authenticate = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS |
| challenge ] ) |  | challenge ] ) |
| Proxy-Authorization = credentials |  | Proxy-Authorization = credentials |
| WWW-Authenticate = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS challenge |  | WWW-Authenticate = *( "," OWS ) challenge *( OWS "," [ OWS challenge |
| ] ) |  | ] ) |
| auth-param = token BWS "=" BWS ( token / quoted-string ) |  | auth-param = token BWS "=" BWS ( token / quoted-string ) |
| auth-scheme = token |  | auth-scheme = token |
| b64token = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" / "." / "_" / "~" / "+" / "/" ) |  | challenge = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( token68 / [ ( "," / auth-param ) *( |
| *"=" |  |  |
| challenge = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( b64token / [ ( "," / auth-param ) *( |  |  |
| OWS "," [ OWS auth-param ] ) ] ) ] |  | OWS "," [ OWS auth-param ] ) ] ) ] |
| credentials = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( b64token / [ ( "," / auth-param ) |  | credentials = auth-scheme [ 1*SP ( token68 / [ ( "," / auth-param ) |
| *( OWS "," [ OWS auth-param ] ) ] ) ] |  | *( OWS "," [ OWS auth-param ] ) ] ) ] |
| quoted-string = <quoted-string, defined in [Part1], Section 3.2.4> |  | quoted-string = <quoted-string, defined in [Part1], Section 3.2.4> |
| token = <token, defined in [Part1], Section 3.2.4> |  | token = <token, defined in [Part1], Section 3.2.4> |
|  |  | token68 = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" / "." / "_" / "~" / "+" / "/" ) |
|  |  | *"=" |
| Appendix D. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) |  | Appendix D. Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication) |
| Changes up to the first Working Group Last Call draft are summarized |  | Changes up to the first Working Group Last Call draft are summarized |
| in <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/html/ |  | in <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/html/ |
| draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19#appendix-C>. |  | draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19#appendix-C>. |
| D.1. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19 |  | D.1. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-19 |
| Closed issues: |  | Closed issues: |
| skipping to change at page 18, line 11 |  | skipping to change at page 17, line 11 |
| o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/357>: |  | o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/357>: |
| "Authentication exchanges" |  | "Authentication exchanges" |
| o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/361>: "ABNF |  | o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/361>: "ABNF |
| requirements for recipients" |  | requirements for recipients" |
| o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/368>: "note |  | o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/368>: "note |
| introduction of new IANA registries as normative changes" |  | introduction of new IANA registries as normative changes" |
|  |  | D.2. Since draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-20 |
|  |  | Closed issues: |
|  |  | o <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/376>: "rename |
|  |  | b64token for clarity" |
|  |  | Other changes: |
|  |  | o Conformance criteria and considerations regarding error handling |
|  |  | are now defined in Part 1. |
| Index |  | Index |
| 4 |  | 4 |
| 401 Unauthorized (status code) 9 |  | 401 Unauthorized (status code) 9 |
| 407 Proxy Authentication Required (status code) 10 |  | 407 Proxy Authentication Required (status code) 9 |
| A |  | A |
| auth-param 5 |  | Authorization header field 9 |
| auth-scheme 5 |  |  |
| Authorization header field 10 |  |  |
| B |  |  |
| b64token 5 |  |  |
| C |  | C |
| Canonical Root URI 7 |  | Canonical Root URI 6 |
| challenge 6 |  |  |
| credentials 6 |  |  |
| G |  | G |
| Grammar |  | Grammar |
| auth-param 5 |  | auth-param 5 |
| auth-scheme 5 |  | auth-scheme 5 |
| Authorization 10 |  | Authorization 9 |
| b64token 5 |  | challenge 5 |
| challenge 6 |  |  |
| credentials 6 |  | credentials 6 |
| Proxy-Authenticate 11 |  | Proxy-Authenticate 10 |
| Proxy-Authorization 11 |  |  |
| WWW-Authenticate 12 |  |  |
| H |  |  |
| Header Fields |  |  |
| Authorization 10 |  |  |
| Proxy-Authenticate 11 |  |  |
| Proxy-Authorization 11 |  | Proxy-Authorization 11 |
| WWW-Authenticate 12 |  | token68 5 |
|  |  | WWW-Authenticate 11 |
| P |  | P |
| Protection Space 7 |  | Protection Space 6 |
| Proxy-Authenticate header field 11 |  | Proxy-Authenticate header field 10 |
| Proxy-Authorization header field 11 |  | Proxy-Authorization header field 10 |
| R |  | R |
| Realm 7 |  | Realm 6 |
| S |  |  |
| Status Codes |  |  |
| 401 Unauthorized 9 |  |  |
| 407 Proxy Authentication Required 10 |  |  |
| W |  | W |
| WWW-Authenticate header field 12 |  | WWW-Authenticate header field 11 |
| Authors' Addresses |  | Authors' Addresses |
| Roy T. Fielding (editor) |  | Roy T. Fielding (editor) |
| Adobe Systems Incorporated |  | Adobe Systems Incorporated |
| 345 Park Ave |  | 345 Park Ave |
| San Jose, CA 95110 |  | San Jose, CA 95110 |
| USA |  | USA |
| EMail: fielding@gbiv.com |  | EMail: fielding@gbiv.com |
| URI: http://roy.gbiv.com/ |  | URI: http://roy.gbiv.com/ |
| Yves Lafon (editor) |  |  |
| World Wide Web Consortium |  |  |
| W3C / ERCIM |  |  |
| 2004, rte des Lucioles |  |  |
| Sophia-Antipolis, AM 06902 |  |  |
| France |  |  |
| EMail: ylafon@w3.org |  |  |
| URI: http://www.raubacapeu.net/people/yves/ |  |  |
| Julian F. Reschke (editor) |  | Julian F. Reschke (editor) |
| greenbytes GmbH |  | greenbytes GmbH |
| Hafenweg 16 |  | Hafenweg 16 |
| Muenster, NW 48155 |  | Muenster, NW 48155 |
| Germany |  | Germany |
| EMail: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de |  | EMail: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de |
| URI: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/ |  | URI: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/ |
End of changes. 39 change blocks.
| 140 lines changed or deleted |  | 88 lines changed or added |
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.38. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/