UMA telecon 2022-12-08

Date and Time

• Primary-week Thursdays 06:30am PT; Secondary-week Thursdays 10:00am PT

  • Screenshare and dial-in: https://zoom.us/j/99487814311?pwd=dTAvZi9uN0ZmeXJReWRrc1Zycm5KZz09

  • United States: +1 346 248 7799, Access Code: 994 8781 4311

  • See UMA calendar for additional details: https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/uma/pages/4857518/Calendar

Agenda

• Approve minutes since UMA telecon 2022-06-30

• Kantara AGM

• FAPI and UMA next steps. OAuth compatible UMA version

• AOB

Attendees

• NOTE: As of Sept 15, 2022, quorum is 3 of 5. (Peter, Sal, Alec, Eve, Steve)

• Voting:

  • Steve

  • Alec

• Non-voting participants:

• Regrets:

Quorum: No

Meeting Minutes

Approve previous meeting minutes

• Approve minutes of UMA telecon 2022-08-11, UMA telecon 2022-08-25, UMA telecon 2022-09-08 , UMA telecon 2022-09-15 , UMA telecon 2022-09-22 , UMA telecon 2022-09-29 , UMA telecon 2022-10-06 , UMA telecon 2022-10-13 , UMA telecon 2022-10-20 , UMA telecon 2022-10-27 , UMA telecon 2022-11-03 , UMA telecon 2022-11-10 , UMA telecon 2022-11-24 , UMA telecon 2022-12-01

• Deferred - no quorum

Topics

UMA leadership elections upcoming

FAPI and UMA next steps - OAuth compatible UMA version

https://fapi.openid.net/ 

Marked up UMA spec: UMA telecon 2022-10-20

Last discussion:UMA telecon 2022-10-27

Goal: existing OAuth clients are able to get access tokens, the RS/AS are using UMA

UMA concepts to keep:

• AS is a gatekeeper for multiple RSs

  • alternative, each RS is also an AS (requires client registrations to each RS)

  • alternative, API gateway in front of many RSs, client has some API-key

• UMA Fedz, language to talk about resources and scope (fine-graned authZ, ability to have scopes with appropriate resources/endpoint boundaries)

RS first flow challenges

• URL sharing (RO->RqP)

• haven’t seen OAuth software that follows www-authenticate responses

• another option (depending if the RS is accessed through a browser or directly) is have the RS be the client to the AS

  • Client <> AS to Client <> RS <> AS

AS first flows

• resource discovery & selection, not part of the client/AS protocol

• RO shares URL of AS (with some ticket/scope attached)

  • RO can create these URLs through interaction with the AS

  • Client has a scope of type they can request, RqP selects resources at the AS through interactive claims gathering

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macaroons_(computer_science) could be used at an AS for RO policy definition and limiting of RqP access

AOB

• December schedule:

  • planning to cancel the Dec 22 and 29th meeting

• could we have a technical companion to the Julie Use-case? It would show a specific deployment/integration architecture and how those components map to UMA roles and configuration. Could compare to an OAuth only solution

Potential Future Work Items / Meeting Topics

• 20 Confluence clean up, archive old items and promote the latest & greatest

  • 10 UMA glossary – Steve has started 

• 100 FAPI Review (FAPI + UMA) 

  • scope: how the FAPI work could be applied to UMA ecosystems

  • review may inform what profiling work is required, eg if UMA must support PAR to work with FAPI

• 120 A financial use-case report (following the Julie healthcare template)

  • either open banking or pensions dashboard

  • openbanking is to FHIR(data model) as FAPI is to SMARTonFHIR(authZ protocol profile)

  • Who would lead this/ needs this for UMA in open banking contexts? Should come after FAPI review?

• 170 UMA + Verifiable Credentials

  • how would VCs work in an UMA ecosystem? How could VCs be used as claims in UMA

  • There are openapi specs for VC formats

  • Could UMA protect a VC presentation or issuance endpoint?

  • There's a lot of openid4vc profiles 

• 300 mDL + UMA

  • scope: how mDL could work in UMA ecosystems, how mDL could be a claim to UMA 

  • is there a role for UMA in token fabrication and referencing it as the RS?

• 600 Review of the email-poc correlated authorization specification

  • https://github.com/umalabs/correlated-authorization

  • https://groups.google.com/g/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/c/BntTknCOAAE/m/EzL9i_VIAwAJ

  • https://groups.google.com/g/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/c/ablVJ9cAreg/m/a_ZpCVrcCQAJ

• 500 UMA + GNAP https://oauth.xyz/specs/ 

  • would we have an UMA GNAP version (eg extension of GNAP or UMA? UMAonGNAP) 

  • will GNAP meet all the UMA outcomes?

• IDPro knowledge base articles

• UMA 2 playground/sandbox

  • eg https://developers.google.com/oauthplayground/, https://www.oauth.com/playground/

• 150 Minor profiling work,

  • resource scopes → scopes 

  • PAR as dynamic scopes eg fhir query params

  • policy manager & policy description

  • 110 pushed claims types: templates + profiles (beyond IDTokens): 171 VCs, 113 consent, policy, mDL

    • use-case, consent as claims (needs_info),

      • if the client has gathered RqP consent, can it be presented to the AS

      • the policy to access a resource says "you must have agreed to this TOS/consent"

      • compare to interactive claims gathering where the AS would present this consent/TOS to the RqP

      • intersection with ANCR/consent receipt/trust registry work in other Kantara groups

Upcoming Conferences