Checking of nonce is essential #344
Closed
+6
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
Good addition. Can you add tests and README information? |
Author
|
Sure
On Sat, May 13, 2017, 14:54 Eduardo Diaz ***@***.***> wrote:
Good addition. Can you add tests and README information?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#344 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACztthOz9Gda1J8FBxnk_Oppz4d3dKmks5r5ZnxgaJpZM4NEqYu>
.
--
typos expected due to mobile device
|
Contributor
|
Closed by #540 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
OpenID ID token is a JWT, and uses a "nonce" field, intended to be provided by the RP and echoed back in the returned JWT token, thus a piece of a JWT payload that is supposed to be checked, often. In fact, my interpretation of RFC7159 suggests that "jti" is more like a server-assigned UUID of the given token, unknown to the consumer beforehand, thus not a possible input to the verification process (or if anything, a negative input to the verification process, where the knowledge and match of a jti would mean that the token has already been "seen" and "consumed", even if the nonce would be matching)