idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits18592/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-20.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (April 30, 2014) is 2942 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ECMAScript' == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms has been published as RFC 7518 == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption has been published as RFC 7516 == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature has been published as RFC 7515 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 6755 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 7159 (Obsoleted by RFC 8259) == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key has been published as RFC 7517 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 OAuth Working Group M. Jones 3 Internet-Draft Microsoft 4 Intended status: Standards Track J. Bradley 5 Expires: November 1, 2014 Ping Identity 6 N. Sakimura 7 NRI 8 April 30, 2014 10 JSON Web Token (JWT) 11 draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-20 13 Abstract 15 JSON Web Token (JWT) is a compact URL-safe means of representing 16 claims to be transferred between two parties. The claims in a JWT 17 are encoded as a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) object that is 18 used as the payload of a JSON Web Signature (JWS) structure or as the 19 plaintext of a JSON Web Encryption (JWE) structure, enabling the 20 claims to be digitally signed or MACed and/or encrypted. 22 The suggested pronunciation of JWT is the same as the English word 23 "jot". 25 Status of this Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on November 1, 2014. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 3. JSON Web Token (JWT) Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 63 3.1. Example JWT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 4. JWT Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 65 4.1. Registered Claim Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 66 4.1.1. "iss" (Issuer) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 67 4.1.2. "sub" (Subject) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 68 4.1.3. "aud" (Audience) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 69 4.1.4. "exp" (Expiration Time) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 70 4.1.5. "nbf" (Not Before) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 71 4.1.6. "iat" (Issued At) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 72 4.1.7. "jti" (JWT ID) Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 73 4.2. Public Claim Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 74 4.3. Private Claim Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 75 5. JWT Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 76 5.1. "typ" (Type) Header Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 77 5.2. "cty" (Content Type) Header Parameter . . . . . . . . . . 11 78 5.3. Replicating Claims as Header Parameters . . . . . . . . . 11 79 6. Plaintext JWTs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 80 6.1. Example Plaintext JWT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 81 7. Rules for Creating and Validating a JWT . . . . . . . . . . . 13 82 7.1. String Comparison Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 83 8. Implementation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 84 9. URI for Declaring that Content is a JWT . . . . . . . . . . . 16 85 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 86 10.1. JSON Web Token Claims Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 87 10.1.1. Registration Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 88 10.1.2. Initial Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 89 10.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of 90 urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt . . . . . . . . . . . 18 91 10.2.1. Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 92 10.3. Media Type Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 93 10.3.1. Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 94 10.4. Registration of JWE Header Parameter Names . . . . . . . . 19 95 10.4.1. Registry Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 97 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 98 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 99 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 100 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 101 Appendix A. JWT Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 102 A.1. Example Encrypted JWT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 103 A.2. Example Nested JWT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 104 Appendix B. Relationship of JWTs to SAML Assertions . . . . . . . 25 105 Appendix C. Relationship of JWTs to Simple Web Tokens (SWTs) . . 26 106 Appendix D. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 107 Appendix E. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 108 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 110 1. Introduction 112 JSON Web Token (JWT) is a compact claims representation format 113 intended for space constrained environments such as HTTP 114 Authorization headers and URI query parameters. JWTs encode claims 115 to be transmitted as a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) [RFC7159] 116 object that is used as the payload of a JSON Web Signature (JWS) 117 [JWS] structure or as the plaintext of a JSON Web Encryption (JWE) 118 [JWE] structure, enabling the claims to be digitally signed or MACed 119 and/or encrypted. JWTs are always represented using the JWS Compact 120 Serialization or the JWE Compact Serialization. 122 The suggested pronunciation of JWT is the same as the English word 123 "jot". 125 1.1. Notational Conventions 127 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 128 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 129 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in Key 130 words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels [RFC2119]. If 131 these words are used without being spelled in uppercase then they are 132 to be interpreted with their normal natural language meanings. 134 2. Terminology 136 JSON Web Token (JWT) 137 A string representing a set of claims as a JSON object that is 138 encoded in a JWS or JWE, enabling the claims to be digitally 139 signed or MACed and/or encrypted. 141 Base64url Encoding 142 Base64 encoding using the URL- and filename-safe character set 143 defined in Section 5 of RFC 4648 [RFC4648], with all trailing '=' 144 characters omitted (as permitted by Section 3.2) and without the 145 inclusion of any line breaks, white space, or other additional 146 characters. (See Appendix C of [JWS] for notes on implementing 147 base64url encoding without padding.) 149 JWT Header 150 A JSON object that describes the cryptographic operations applied 151 to the JWT. When the JWT is digitally signed or MACed, the JWT 152 Header is a JWS Header. When the JWT is encrypted, the JWT Header 153 is a JWE Header. 155 Header Parameter 156 A name/value pair that is member of the JWT Header. 158 Header Parameter Name 159 The name of a member of the JWT Header. 161 Header Parameter Value 162 The value of a member of the JWT Header. 164 JWT Claims Set 165 A JSON object that contains the Claims conveyed by the JWT. 167 Claim 168 A piece of information asserted about a subject. A Claim is 169 represented as a name/value pair consisting of a Claim Name and a 170 Claim Value. 172 Claim Name 173 The name portion of a Claim representation. A Claim Name is 174 always a string. 176 Claim Value 177 The value portion of a Claim representation. A Claim Value can be 178 any JSON value. 180 Encoded JWT Header 181 Base64url encoding of the JWT Header. 183 Nested JWT 184 A JWT in which nested signing and/or encryption are employed. In 185 nested JWTs, a JWT is used as the payload or plaintext value of an 186 enclosing JWS or JWE structure, respectively. 188 Plaintext JWT 189 A JWT whose Claims are not integrity protected or encrypted. 191 Collision-Resistant Name 192 A name in a namespace that enables names to be allocated in a 193 manner such that they are highly unlikely to collide with other 194 names. Examples of collision-resistant namespaces include: Domain 195 Names, Object Identifiers (OIDs) as defined in the ITU-T X.660 and 196 X.670 Recommendation series, and Universally Unique IDentifiers 197 (UUIDs) [RFC4122]. When using an administratively delegated 198 namespace, the definer of a name needs to take reasonable 199 precautions to ensure they are in control of the portion of the 200 namespace they use to define the name. 202 StringOrURI 203 A JSON string value, with the additional requirement that while 204 arbitrary string values MAY be used, any value containing a ":" 205 character MUST be a URI [RFC3986]. StringOrURI values are 206 compared as case-sensitive strings with no transformations or 207 canonicalizations applied. 209 IntDate 210 A JSON numeric value representing the number of seconds from 1970- 211 01-01T0:0:0Z UTC until the specified UTC date/time. See RFC 3339 212 [RFC3339] for details regarding date/times in general and UTC in 213 particular. 215 3. JSON Web Token (JWT) Overview 217 JWTs represent a set of claims as a JSON object that is encoded in a 218 JWS and/or JWE structure. This JSON object is the JWT Claims Set. As 219 per Section 4 of [RFC7159], the JSON object consists of zero or more 220 name/value pairs (or members), where the names are strings and the 221 values are arbitrary JSON values. These members are the claims 222 represented by the JWT. 224 The member names within the JWT Claims Set are referred to as Claim 225 Names. The corresponding values are referred to as Claim Values. 227 The contents of the JWT Header describe the cryptographic operations 228 applied to the JWT Claims Set. If the JWT Header is a JWS Header, the 229 JWT is represented as a JWS, and the claims are digitally signed or 230 MACed, with the JWT Claims Set being the JWS Payload. If the JWT 231 Header is a JWE Header, the JWT is represented as a JWE, and the 232 claims are encrypted, with the JWT Claims Set being the input 233 Plaintext. A JWT may be enclosed in another JWE or JWS structure to 234 create a Nested JWT, enabling nested signing and encryption to be 235 performed. 237 A JWT is represented as a sequence of URL-safe parts separated by 238 period ('.') characters. Each part contains a base64url encoded 239 value. The number of parts in the JWT is dependent upon the 240 representation of the resulting JWS or JWE object using the JWS 241 Compact Serialization or the JWE Compact Serialization. 243 3.1. Example JWT 245 The following example JWT Header declares that the encoded object is 246 a JSON Web Token (JWT) and the JWT is a JWS that is MACed using the 247 HMAC SHA-256 algorithm: 249 {"typ":"JWT", 250 "alg":"HS256"} 252 To remove potential ambiguities in the representation of the JSON 253 object above, the octet sequence for the actual UTF-8 representation 254 used in this example for the JWT Header/JWS Header above is also 255 included below. (Note that ambiguities can arise due to differing 256 platform representations of line breaks (CRLF versus LF), differing 257 spacing at the beginning and ends of lines, whether the last line has 258 a terminating line break or not, and other causes. In the 259 representation used in this example, the first line has no leading or 260 trailing spaces, a CRLF line break (13, 10) occurs between the first 261 and second lines, the second line has one leading space (32) and no 262 trailing spaces, and the last line does not have a terminating line 263 break.) The octets representing the UTF-8 representation of the JWS 264 Header in this example (using JSON array notation) are: 266 [123, 34, 116, 121, 112, 34, 58, 34, 74, 87, 84, 34, 44, 13, 10, 32, 267 34, 97, 108, 103, 34, 58, 34, 72, 83, 50, 53, 54, 34, 125] 269 Base64url encoding the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the JWT 270 Header yields this Encoded JWT Header value (which is also the 271 underlying encoded JWS Header value): 273 eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLA0KICJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9 275 The following is an example of a JWT Claims Set: 277 {"iss":"joe", 278 "exp":1300819380, 279 "http://example.com/is_root":true} 281 The following octet sequence, which is the UTF-8 representation used 282 in this example for the JWT Claims Set above, is the JWS Payload: 284 [123, 34, 105, 115, 115, 34, 58, 34, 106, 111, 101, 34, 44, 13, 10, 285 32, 34, 101, 120, 112, 34, 58, 49, 51, 48, 48, 56, 49, 57, 51, 56, 286 48, 44, 13, 10, 32, 34, 104, 116, 116, 112, 58, 47, 47, 101, 120, 97, 287 109, 112, 108, 101, 46, 99, 111, 109, 47, 105, 115, 95, 114, 111, 288 111, 116, 34, 58, 116, 114, 117, 101, 125] 290 Base64url encoding the JWS Payload yields this encoded JWS Payload 291 (with line breaks for display purposes only): 293 eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLA0KICJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsDQogImh0dHA6Ly 294 9leGFtcGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ 296 Computing the MAC of the encoded JWS Header and encoded JWS Payload 297 with the HMAC SHA-256 algorithm and base64url encoding the HMAC value 298 in the manner specified in [JWS], yields this encoded JWS Signature: 300 dBjftJeZ4CVP-mB92K27uhbUJU1p1r_wW1gFWFOEjXk 302 Concatenating these encoded parts in this order with period ('.') 303 characters between the parts yields this complete JWT (with line 304 breaks for display purposes only): 306 eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLA0KICJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9 307 . 308 eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLA0KICJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsDQogImh0dHA6Ly9leGFt 309 cGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ 310 . 311 dBjftJeZ4CVP-mB92K27uhbUJU1p1r_wW1gFWFOEjXk 313 This computation is illustrated in more detail in Appendix A.1 of 314 [JWS]. See Appendix A.1 for an example of an encrypted JWT. 316 4. JWT Claims 318 The JWT Claims Set represents a JSON object whose members are the 319 claims conveyed by the JWT. The Claim Names within a JWT Claims Set 320 MUST be unique; recipients MUST either reject JWTs with duplicate 321 Claim Names or use a JSON parser that returns only the lexically last 322 duplicate member name, as specified in Section 15.12 (The JSON 323 Object) of ECMAScript 5.1 [ECMAScript]. 325 The set of claims that a JWT must contain to be considered valid is 326 context-dependent and is outside the scope of this specification. 327 Specific applications of JWTs will require implementations to 328 understand and process some claims in particular ways. However, in 329 the absence of such requirements, all claims that are not understood 330 by implementations MUST be ignored. 332 There are three classes of JWT Claim Names: Registered Claim Names, 333 Public Claim Names, and Private Claim Names. 335 4.1. Registered Claim Names 337 The following Claim Names are registered in the IANA JSON Web Token 338 Claims registry defined in Section 10.1. None of the claims defined 339 below are intended to be mandatory to use or implement in all cases, 340 but rather, provide a starting point for a set of useful, 341 interoperable claims. Applications using JWTs should define which 342 specific claims they use and when they are required or optional. All 343 the names are short because a core goal of JWTs is for the 344 representation to be compact. 346 4.1.1. "iss" (Issuer) Claim 348 The "iss" (issuer) claim identifies the principal that issued the 349 JWT. The processing of this claim is generally application specific. 350 The "iss" value is a case-sensitive string containing a StringOrURI 351 value. Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 353 4.1.2. "sub" (Subject) Claim 355 The "sub" (subject) claim identifies the principal that is the 356 subject of the JWT. The Claims in a JWT are normally statements 357 about the subject. The subject value MAY be scoped to be locally 358 unique in the context of the issuer or MAY be globally unique. The 359 processing of this claim is generally application specific. The 360 "sub" value is a case-sensitive string containing a StringOrURI 361 value. Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 363 4.1.3. "aud" (Audience) Claim 365 The "aud" (audience) claim identifies the recipients that the JWT is 366 intended for. Each principal intended to process the JWT MUST 367 identify itself with a value in the audience claim. If the principal 368 processing the claim does not identify itself with a value in the 369 "aud" claim when this claim is present, then the JWT MUST be 370 rejected. In the general case, the "aud" value is an array of case- 371 sensitive strings, each containing a StringOrURI value. In the 372 special case when the JWT has one audience, the "aud" value MAY be a 373 single case-sensitive string containing a StringOrURI value. The 374 interpretation of audience values is generally application specific. 375 Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 377 4.1.4. "exp" (Expiration Time) Claim 379 The "exp" (expiration time) claim identifies the expiration time on 380 or after which the JWT MUST NOT be accepted for processing. The 381 processing of the "exp" claim requires that the current date/time 382 MUST be before the expiration date/time listed in the "exp" claim. 383 Implementers MAY provide for some small leeway, usually no more than 384 a few minutes, to account for clock skew. Its value MUST be a number 385 containing an IntDate value. Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 387 4.1.5. "nbf" (Not Before) Claim 389 The "nbf" (not before) claim identifies the time before which the JWT 390 MUST NOT be accepted for processing. The processing of the "nbf" 391 claim requires that the current date/time MUST be after or equal to 392 the not-before date/time listed in the "nbf" claim. Implementers MAY 393 provide for some small leeway, usually no more than a few minutes, to 394 account for clock skew. Its value MUST be a number containing an 395 IntDate value. Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 397 4.1.6. "iat" (Issued At) Claim 399 The "iat" (issued at) claim identifies the time at which the JWT was 400 issued. This claim can be used to determine the age of the JWT. Its 401 value MUST be a number containing an IntDate value. Use of this 402 claim is OPTIONAL. 404 4.1.7. "jti" (JWT ID) Claim 406 The "jti" (JWT ID) claim provides a unique identifier for the JWT. 407 The identifier value MUST be assigned in a manner that ensures that 408 there is a negligible probability that the same value will be 409 accidentally assigned to a different data object. The "jti" claim 410 can be used to prevent the JWT from being replayed. The "jti" value 411 is a case-sensitive string. Use of this claim is OPTIONAL. 413 4.2. Public Claim Names 415 Claim Names can be defined at will by those using JWTs. However, in 416 order to prevent collisions, any new Claim Name should either be 417 registered in the IANA JSON Web Token Claims registry defined in 418 Section 10.1 or be a Public Name: a value that contains a Collision- 419 Resistant Name. In each case, the definer of the name or value needs 420 to take reasonable precautions to make sure they are in control of 421 the part of the namespace they use to define the Claim Name. 423 4.3. Private Claim Names 425 A producer and consumer of a JWT MAY agree to use Claim Names that 426 are Private Names: names that are not Registered Claim Names 427 Section 4.1 or Public Claim Names Section 4.2. Unlike Public Claim 428 Names, Private Claim Names are subject to collision and should be 429 used with caution. 431 5. JWT Header 433 The members of the JSON object represented by the JWT Header describe 434 the cryptographic operations applied to the JWT and optionally, 435 additional properties of the JWT. The member names within the JWT 436 Header are referred to as Header Parameter Names. These names MUST 437 be unique; recipients MUST either reject JWTs with duplicate Header 438 Parameter Names or use a JSON parser that returns only the lexically 439 last duplicate member name, as specified in Section 15.12 (The JSON 440 Object) of ECMAScript 5.1 [ECMAScript]. The corresponding values are 441 referred to as Header Parameter Values. 443 JWS Header Parameters are defined by [JWS]. JWE Header Parameters 444 are defined by [JWE]. This specification further specifies the use 445 of the following Header Parameters in both the cases where the JWT is 446 a JWS and where it is a JWE. 448 5.1. "typ" (Type) Header Parameter 450 The "typ" (type) Header Parameter defined by [JWS] and [JWE] is used 451 to declare the MIME Media Type [IANA.MediaTypes] of this complete JWT 452 in contexts where this is useful to the application. This parameter 453 has no effect upon the JWT processing. If present, it is RECOMMENDED 454 that its value be "JWT" to indicate that this object is a JWT. While 455 media type names are not case-sensitive, it is RECOMMENDED that "JWT" 456 always be spelled using uppercase characters for compatibility with 457 legacy implementations. Use of this Header Parameter is OPTIONAL. 459 5.2. "cty" (Content Type) Header Parameter 461 The "cty" (content type) Header Parameter defined by [JWS] and [JWE] 462 is used by this specification to convey structural information about 463 the JWT. 465 In the normal case where nested signing or encryption operations are 466 not employed, the use of this Header Parameter is NOT RECOMMENDED. 467 In the case that nested signing or encryption is employed, this 468 Header Parameter MUST be present; in this case, the value MUST be 469 "JWT", to indicate that a Nested JWT is carried in this JWT. While 470 media type names are not case-sensitive, it is RECOMMENDED that "JWT" 471 always be spelled using uppercase characters for compatibility with 472 legacy implementations. See Appendix A.2 for an example of a Nested 473 JWT. 475 5.3. Replicating Claims as Header Parameters 477 In some applications using encrypted JWTs, it is useful to have an 478 unencrypted representation of some Claims. This might be used, for 479 instance, in application processing rules to determine whether and 480 how to process the JWT before it is decrypted. 482 This specification allows Claims present in the JWT Claims Set to be 483 replicated as Header Parameters in a JWT that is a JWE, as needed by 484 the application. If such replicated Claims are present, the 485 application receiving them SHOULD verify that their values are 486 identical, unless the application defines other specific processing 487 rules for these Claims. It is the responsibility of the application 488 to ensure that only claims that are safe to be transmitted in an 489 unencrypted manner are replicated as Header Parameter Values in the 490 JWT. 492 Section 10.4.1 of this specification registers the "iss" (issuer), 493 "sub" (subject), and "aud" (audience) Header Parameter Names for the 494 purpose of providing unencrypted replicas of these Claims in 495 encrypted JWTs for applications that need them. Other specifications 496 MAY similarly register other names that are registered Claim Names as 497 Header Parameter Names, as needed. 499 6. Plaintext JWTs 501 To support use cases where the JWT content is secured by a means 502 other than a signature and/or encryption contained within the JWT 503 (such as a signature on a data structure containing the JWT), JWTs 504 MAY also be created without a signature or encryption. A plaintext 505 JWT is a JWS using the "none" JWS "alg" Header Parameter Value 506 defined in JSON Web Algorithms (JWA) [JWA]; it is a JWS with the 507 empty string for its JWS Signature value. 509 6.1. Example Plaintext JWT 511 The following example JWT Header declares that the encoded object is 512 a Plaintext JWT: 514 {"alg":"none"} 516 Base64url encoding the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the JWT 517 Header yields this Encoded JWT Header: 519 eyJhbGciOiJub25lIn0 521 The following is an example of a JWT Claims Set: 523 {"iss":"joe", 524 "exp":1300819380, 525 "http://example.com/is_root":true} 527 Base64url encoding the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the JWT 528 Claims Set yields this encoded JWS Payload (with line breaks for 529 display purposes only): 531 eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLA0KICJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsDQogImh0dHA6Ly9leGFt 532 cGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ 534 The encoded JWS Signature is the empty string. 536 Concatenating these encoded parts in this order with period ('.') 537 characters between the parts yields this complete JWT (with line 538 breaks for display purposes only): 540 eyJhbGciOiJub25lIn0 541 . 542 eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLA0KICJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsDQogImh0dHA6Ly9leGFt 543 cGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ 544 . 546 7. Rules for Creating and Validating a JWT 548 To create a JWT, the following steps MUST be taken. The order of the 549 steps is not significant in cases where there are no dependencies 550 between the inputs and outputs of the steps. 552 1. Create a JWT Claims Set containing the desired claims. Note that 553 white space is explicitly allowed in the representation and no 554 canonicalization need be performed before encoding. 556 2. Let the Message be the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the 557 JWT Claims Set. 559 3. Create a JWT Header containing the desired set of Header 560 Parameters. The JWT MUST conform to either the [JWS] or [JWE] 561 specifications. Note that white space is explicitly allowed in 562 the representation and no canonicalization need be performed 563 before encoding. 565 4. Depending upon whether the JWT is a JWS or JWE, there are two 566 cases: 568 * If the JWT is a JWS, create a JWS using the JWT Header as the 569 JWS Header and the Message as the JWS Payload; all steps 570 specified in [JWS] for creating a JWS MUST be followed. 572 * Else, if the JWT is a JWE, create a JWE using the JWT Header 573 as the JWE Header and the Message as the JWE Plaintext; all 574 steps specified in [JWE] for creating a JWE MUST be followed. 576 5. If a nested signing or encryption operation will be performed, 577 let the Message be the JWS or JWE, and return to Step 3, using a 578 "cty" (content type) value of "JWT" in the new JWT Header created 579 in that step. 581 6. Otherwise, let the resulting JWT be the JWS or JWE. 583 When validating a JWT, the following steps MUST be taken. The order 584 of the steps is not significant in cases where there are no 585 dependencies between the inputs and outputs of the steps. If any of 586 the listed steps fails then the JWT MUST be rejected for processing. 588 1. The JWT MUST contain at least one period ('.') character. 590 2. Let the Encoded JWT Header be the portion of the JWT before the 591 first period ('.') character. 593 3. The Encoded JWT Header MUST be successfully base64url decoded 594 following the restriction given in this specification that no 595 padding characters have been used. 597 4. The resulting JWT Header MUST be completely valid JSON syntax 598 conforming to [RFC7159]. 600 5. The resulting JWT Header MUST be validated to only include 601 parameters and values whose syntax and semantics are both 602 understood and supported or that are specified as being ignored 603 when not understood. 605 6. Determine whether the JWT is a JWS or a JWE using any of the 606 methods described in Section 9 of [JWE]. 608 7. Depending upon whether the JWT is a JWS or JWE, there are two 609 cases: 611 * If the JWT is a JWS, all steps specified in [JWS] for 612 validating a JWS MUST be followed. Let the Message be the 613 result of base64url decoding the JWS Payload. 615 * Else, if the JWT is a JWE, all steps specified in [JWE] for 616 validating a JWE MUST be followed. Let the Message be the 617 JWE Plaintext. 619 8. If the JWT Header contains a "cty" (content type) value of 620 "JWT", then the Message is a JWT that was the subject of nested 621 signing or encryption operations. In this case, return to Step 622 1, using the Message as the JWT. 624 9. Otherwise, let the JWT Claims Set be the Message. 626 10. The JWT Claims Set MUST be completely valid JSON syntax 627 conforming to [RFC7159]. 629 7.1. String Comparison Rules 631 Processing a JWT inevitably requires comparing known strings to 632 values in JSON objects. For example, in checking what the algorithm 633 is, the Unicode string encoding "alg" will be checked against the 634 member names in the JWT Header to see if there is a matching Header 635 Parameter Name. 637 Comparisons between JSON strings and other Unicode strings MUST be 638 performed by comparing Unicode code points without normalization, as 639 specified in the String Comparison Rules in Section 5.3 of [JWS]. 641 8. Implementation Requirements 643 This section defines which algorithms and features of this 644 specification are mandatory to implement. Applications using this 645 specification can impose additional requirements upon implementations 646 that they use. For instance, an application might require support 647 for encrypted JWTs and Nested JWTs; another might require support for 648 signing JWTs with ECDSA using the P-256 curve and the SHA-256 hash 649 algorithm ("ES256"). 651 Of the signature and MAC algorithms specified in JSON Web Algorithms 652 (JWA) [JWA], only HMAC SHA-256 ("HS256") and "none" MUST be 653 implemented by conforming JWT implementations. It is RECOMMENDED 654 that implementations also support RSASSA-PKCS1-V1_5 with the SHA-256 655 hash algorithm ("RS256") and ECDSA using the P-256 curve and the SHA- 656 256 hash algorithm ("ES256"). Support for other algorithms and key 657 sizes is OPTIONAL. 659 Support for encrypted JWTs is OPTIONAL. If an implementation 660 provides encryption capabilities, of the encryption algorithms 661 specified in [JWA], only RSAES-PKCS1-V1_5 with 2048 bit keys 662 ("RSA1_5"), AES Key Wrap with 128 and 256 bit keys ("A128KW" and 663 "A256KW"), and the composite authenticated encryption algorithm using 664 AES CBC and HMAC SHA-2 ("A128CBC-HS256" and "A256CBC-HS512") MUST be 665 implemented by conforming implementations. It is RECOMMENDED that 666 implementations also support using ECDH-ES to agree upon a key used 667 to wrap the Content Encryption Key ("ECDH-ES+A128KW" and 668 "ECDH-ES+A256KW") and AES in Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) with 128 bit 669 and 256 bit keys ("A128GCM" and "A256GCM"). Support for other 670 algorithms and key sizes is OPTIONAL. 672 Support for Nested JWTs is OPTIONAL. 674 9. URI for Declaring that Content is a JWT 676 This specification registers the URN 677 "urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt" for use by applications that 678 declare content types using URIs (rather than, for instance, MIME 679 Media Types) to indicate that the content referred to is a JWT. 681 10. IANA Considerations 683 10.1. JSON Web Token Claims Registry 685 This specification establishes the IANA JSON Web Token Claims 686 registry for JWT Claim Names. The registry records the Claim Name 687 and a reference to the specification that defines it. This 688 specification registers the Claim Names defined in Section 4.1. 690 Values are registered with a Specification Required [RFC5226] after a 691 two-week review period on the [TBD]@ietf.org mailing list, on the 692 advice of one or more Designated Experts. However, to allow for the 693 allocation of values prior to publication, the Designated Expert(s) 694 may approve registration once they are satisfied that such a 695 specification will be published. 697 Registration requests must be sent to the [TBD]@ietf.org mailing list 698 for review and comment, with an appropriate subject (e.g., "Request 699 for access token type: example"). [[ Note to the RFC Editor: The name 700 of the mailing list should be determined in consultation with the 701 IESG and IANA. Suggested name: jwt-reg-review. ]] 703 Within the review period, the Designated Expert(s) will either 704 approve or deny the registration request, communicating this decision 705 to the review list and IANA. Denials should include an explanation 706 and, if applicable, suggestions as to how to make the request 707 successful. Registration requests that are undetermined for a period 708 longer than 21 days can be brought to the IESG's attention (using the 709 iesg@iesg.org mailing list) for resolution. 711 Criteria that should be applied by the Designated Expert(s) includes 712 determining whether the proposed registration duplicates existing 713 functionality, determining whether it is likely to be of general 714 applicability or whether it is useful only for a single application, 715 and whether the registration makes sense. 717 IANA must only accept registry updates from the Designated Expert(s) 718 and should direct all requests for registration to the review mailing 719 list. 721 It is suggested that multiple Designated Experts be appointed who are 722 able to represent the perspectives of different applications using 723 this specification, in order to enable broadly-informed review of 724 registration decisions. In cases where a registration decision could 725 be perceived as creating a conflict of interest for a particular 726 Expert, that Expert should defer to the judgment of the other 727 Expert(s). 729 10.1.1. Registration Template 731 Claim Name: 732 The name requested (e.g., "example"). Because a core goal of this 733 specification is for the resulting representations to be compact, 734 it is RECOMMENDED that the name be short -- not to exceed 8 735 characters without a compelling reason to do so. This name is 736 case-sensitive. Names may not match other registered names in a 737 case-insensitive manner unless the Designated Expert(s) state that 738 there is a compelling reason to allow an exception in this 739 particular case. 741 Claim Description: 742 Brief description of the Claim (e.g., "Example description"). 744 Change Controller: 745 For Standards Track RFCs, state "IESG". For others, give the name 746 of the responsible party. Other details (e.g., postal address, 747 email address, home page URI) may also be included. 749 Specification Document(s): 750 Reference to the document(s) that specify the parameter, 751 preferably including URI(s) that can be used to retrieve copies of 752 the document(s). An indication of the relevant sections may also 753 be included but is not required. 755 10.1.2. Initial Registry Contents 757 o Claim Name: "iss" 758 o Claim Description: Issuer 759 o Change Controller: IESG 760 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.1 of [[ this document ]] 762 o Claim Name: "sub" 763 o Claim Description: Subject 764 o Change Controller: IESG 765 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.2 of [[ this document ]] 766 o Claim Name: "aud" 767 o Claim Description: Audience 768 o Change Controller: IESG 769 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.3 of [[ this document ]] 771 o Claim Name: "exp" 772 o Claim Description: Expiration Time 773 o Change Controller: IESG 774 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.4 of [[ this document ]] 776 o Claim Name: "nbf" 777 o Claim Description: Not Before 778 o Change Controller: IESG 779 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.5 of [[ this document ]] 781 o Claim Name: "iat" 782 o Claim Description: Issued At 783 o Change Controller: IESG 784 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.6 of [[ this document ]] 786 o Claim Name: "jti" 787 o Claim Description: JWT ID 788 o Change Controller: IESG 789 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.7 of [[ this document ]] 791 10.2. Sub-Namespace Registration of 792 urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt 794 10.2.1. Registry Contents 796 This specification registers the value "token-type:jwt" in the IANA 797 urn:ietf:params:oauth registry established in An IETF URN Sub- 798 Namespace for OAuth [RFC6755], which can be used to indicate that the 799 content is a JWT. 801 o URN: urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt 802 o Common Name: JSON Web Token (JWT) Token Type 803 o Change Controller: IESG 804 o Specification Document(s): [[this document]] 806 10.3. Media Type Registration 808 10.3.1. Registry Contents 810 This specification registers the "application/jwt" Media Type 811 [RFC2046] in the MIME Media Types registry [IANA.MediaTypes], which 812 can be used to indicate that the content is a JWT. 814 o Type Name: application 815 o Subtype Name: jwt 816 o Required Parameters: n/a 817 o Optional Parameters: n/a 818 o Encoding considerations: 8bit; JWT values are encoded as a series 819 of base64url encoded values (some of which may be the empty 820 string) separated by period ('.') characters. 821 o Security Considerations: See the Security Considerations section 822 of [[ this document ]] 823 o Interoperability Considerations: n/a 824 o Published Specification: [[ this document ]] 825 o Applications that use this media type: OpenID Connect, Mozilla 826 Persona, Salesforce, Google, numerous others 827 o Additional Information: Magic number(s): n/a, File extension(s): 828 n/a, Macintosh file type code(s): n/a 829 o Person & email address to contact for further information: Michael 830 B. Jones, mbj@microsoft.com 831 o Intended Usage: COMMON 832 o Restrictions on Usage: none 833 o Author: Michael B. Jones, mbj@microsoft.com 834 o Change Controller: IESG 836 10.4. Registration of JWE Header Parameter Names 838 This specification registers specific Claim Names defined in 839 Section 4.1 in the IANA JSON Web Signature and Encryption Header 840 Parameters registry defined in [JWS] for use by Claims replicated as 841 Header Parameters, per Section 5.3. 843 10.4.1. Registry Contents 845 o Header Parameter Name: "iss" 846 o Header Parameter Description: Issuer 847 o Header Parameter Usage Location(s): JWE 848 o Change Controller: IESG 849 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.1 of [[ this document ]] 851 o Header Parameter Name: "sub" 852 o Header Parameter Description: Subject 853 o Header Parameter Usage Location(s): JWE 854 o Change Controller: IESG 855 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.2 of [[ this document ]] 857 o Header Parameter Name: "aud" 858 o Header Parameter Description: Audience 859 o Header Parameter Usage Location(s): JWE 860 o Change Controller: IESG 861 o Specification Document(s): Section 4.1.3 of [[ this document ]] 863 11. Security Considerations 865 All of the security issues faced by any cryptographic application 866 must be faced by a JWT/JWS/JWE/JWK agent. Among these issues are 867 protecting the user's private and symmetric keys, preventing various 868 attacks, and helping the user avoid mistakes such as inadvertently 869 encrypting a message for the wrong recipient. The entire list of 870 security considerations is beyond the scope of this document. 872 All the security considerations in the JWS specification also apply 873 to JWT, as do the JWE security considerations when encryption is 874 employed. In particular, the JWS JSON Security Considerations and 875 Unicode Comparison Security Considerations apply equally to the JWT 876 Claims Set in the same manner that they do to the JWS Header. 878 While syntactically, the signing and encryption operations for Nested 879 JWTs may be applied in any order, normally senders should sign the 880 message and then encrypt the result (thus encrypting the signature). 881 This prevents attacks in which the signature is stripped, leaving 882 just an encrypted message, as well as providing privacy for the 883 signer. Furthermore, signatures over encrypted text are not 884 considered valid in many jurisdictions. 886 Note that potential concerns about security issues related to the 887 order of signing and encryption operations are already addressed by 888 the underlying JWS and JWE specifications; in particular, because JWE 889 only supports the use of authenticated encryption algorithms, 890 cryptographic concerns about the potential need to sign after 891 encryption that apply in many contexts do not apply to this 892 specification. 894 The contents of a JWT cannot be relied upon in a trust decision 895 unless its contents have been cryptographically secured and bound to 896 the context necessary for the trust decision. In particular, the 897 key(s) used to sign and/or encrypt the JWT will typically need to 898 verifiably be under the control of the party identified as the issuer 899 of the JWT. 901 12. References 902 12.1. Normative References 904 [ECMAScript] 905 Ecma International, "ECMAScript Language Specification, 906 5.1 Edition", ECMA 262, June 2011. 908 [IANA.MediaTypes] 909 Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), "MIME Media 910 Types", 2005. 912 [JWA] Jones, M., "JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)", 913 draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms (work in progress), 914 April 2014. 916 [JWE] Jones, M. and J. Hildebrand, "JSON Web Encryption (JWE)", 917 draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption (work in progress), 918 April 2014. 920 [JWS] Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web 921 Signature (JWS)", draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature (work 922 in progress), April 2014. 924 [RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail 925 Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, 926 November 1996. 928 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 929 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 931 [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform 932 Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, 933 RFC 3986, January 2005. 935 [RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data 936 Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006. 938 [RFC6755] Campbell, B. and H. Tschofenig, "An IETF URN Sub-Namespace 939 for OAuth", RFC 6755, October 2012. 941 [RFC7159] Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data 942 Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014. 944 12.2. Informative References 946 [CanvasApp] 947 Facebook, "Canvas Applications", 2010. 949 [JSS] Bradley, J. and N. Sakimura (editor), "JSON Simple Sign", 950 September 2010. 952 [JWK] Jones, M., "JSON Web Key (JWK)", 953 draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key (work in progress), 954 April 2014. 956 [MagicSignatures] 957 Panzer (editor), J., Laurie, B., and D. Balfanz, "Magic 958 Signatures", January 2011. 960 [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] 961 Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., and E. Maler, 962 "Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security Assertion 963 Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", OASIS Standard saml-core- 964 2.0-os, March 2005. 966 [RFC3275] Eastlake, D., Reagle, J., and D. Solo, "(Extensible Markup 967 Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, 968 March 2002. 970 [RFC3339] Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the 971 Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002. 973 [RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally 974 Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, 975 July 2005. 977 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 978 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 979 May 2008. 981 [SWT] Hardt, D. and Y. Goland, "Simple Web Token (SWT)", 982 Version 0.9.5.1, November 2009. 984 [W3C.CR-xml11-20021015] 985 Cowan, J., "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1", W3C 986 CR CR-xml11-20021015, October 2002. 988 [W3C.REC-xml-c14n-20010315] 989 Boyer, J., "Canonical XML Version 1.0", World Wide Web 990 Consortium Recommendation REC-xml-c14n-20010315, 991 March 2001, 992 . 994 Appendix A. JWT Examples 996 This section contains examples of JWTs. For other example JWTs, see 997 Section 6.1 and Appendices A.1, A.2, and A.3 of [JWS]. 999 A.1. Example Encrypted JWT 1001 This example encrypts the same claims as used in Section 3.1 to the 1002 recipient using RSAES-PKCS1-V1_5 and AES_128_CBC_HMAC_SHA_256. 1004 The following example JWE Header (with line breaks for display 1005 purposes only) declares that: 1007 o the Content Encryption Key is encrypted to the recipient using the 1008 RSAES-PKCS1-V1_5 algorithm to produce the JWE Encrypted Key and 1010 o the Plaintext is encrypted using the AES_128_CBC_HMAC_SHA_256 1011 algorithm to produce the Ciphertext. 1013 {"alg":"RSA1_5","enc":"A128CBC-HS256"} 1015 Other than using the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the JWT 1016 Claims Set from Section 3.1 as the plaintext value, the computation 1017 of this JWT is identical to the computation of the JWE in Appendix 1018 A.2 of [JWE], including the keys used. 1020 The final result in this example (with line breaks for display 1021 purposes only) is: 1023 eyJhbGciOiJSU0ExXzUiLCJlbmMiOiJBMTI4Q0JDLUhTMjU2In0. 1024 QR1Owv2ug2WyPBnbQrRARTeEk9kDO2w8qDcjiHnSJflSdv1iNqhWXaKH4MqAkQtM 1025 oNfABIPJaZm0HaA415sv3aeuBWnD8J-Ui7Ah6cWafs3ZwwFKDFUUsWHSK-IPKxLG 1026 TkND09XyjORj_CHAgOPJ-Sd8ONQRnJvWn_hXV1BNMHzUjPyYwEsRhDhzjAD26ima 1027 sOTsgruobpYGoQcXUwFDn7moXPRfDE8-NoQX7N7ZYMmpUDkR-Cx9obNGwJQ3nM52 1028 YCitxoQVPzjbl7WBuB7AohdBoZOdZ24WlN1lVIeh8v1K4krB8xgKvRU8kgFrEn_a 1029 1rZgN5TiysnmzTROF869lQ. 1030 AxY8DCtDaGlsbGljb3RoZQ. 1031 MKOle7UQrG6nSxTLX6Mqwt0orbHvAKeWnDYvpIAeZ72deHxz3roJDXQyhxx0wKaM 1032 HDjUEOKIwrtkHthpqEanSBNYHZgmNOV7sln1Eu9g3J8. 1033 fiK51VwhsxJ-siBMR-YFiA 1035 A.2. Example Nested JWT 1037 This example shows how a JWT can be used as the payload of a JWE or 1038 JWS to create a Nested JWT. In this case, the JWT Claims Set is 1039 first signed, and then encrypted. 1041 The inner signed JWT is identical to the example in Appendix A.2 of 1042 [JWS]. Therefore, its computation is not repeated here. This 1043 example then encrypts this inner JWT to the recipient using RSAES- 1044 PKCS1-V1_5 and AES_128_CBC_HMAC_SHA_256. 1046 The following example JWE Header (with line breaks for display 1047 purposes only) declares that: 1049 o the Content Encryption Key is encrypted to the recipient using the 1050 RSAES-PKCS1-V1_5 algorithm to produce the JWE Encrypted Key, 1052 o the Plaintext is encrypted using the AES_128_CBC_HMAC_SHA_256 1053 algorithm to produce the Ciphertext, and 1055 o the Plaintext is itself a JWT. 1057 {"alg":"RSA1_5","enc":"A128CBC-HS256","cty":"JWT"} 1059 Base64url encoding the octets of the UTF-8 representation of the JWE 1060 Header yields this encoded JWE Header value: 1062 eyJhbGciOiJSU0ExXzUiLCJlbmMiOiJBMTI4Q0JDLUhTMjU2IiwiY3R5IjoiSldUIn0 1064 The computation of this JWT is identical to the computation of the 1065 JWE in Appendix A.2 of [JWE], other than that different JWE Header, 1066 Plaintext, Initialization Vector, and Content Encryption Key values 1067 are used. (The RSA key used is the same.) 1069 The Payload used is the octets of the ASCII representation of the JWT 1070 at the end of Appendix A.2.1 of [JWS] (with all whitespace and line 1071 breaks removed), which is a sequence of 458 octets. 1073 The Initialization Vector value used (using JSON array notation) is: 1075 [82, 101, 100, 109, 111, 110, 100, 32, 87, 65, 32, 57, 56, 48, 53, 1076 50] 1078 This example uses the Content Encryption Key represented in JSON Web 1079 Key [JWK] format below: 1081 {"kty":"oct", 1082 "k":"GawgguFyGrWKav7AX4VKUg" 1083 } 1085 The final result for this Nested JWT (with line breaks for display 1086 purposes only) is: 1088 eyJhbGciOiJSU0ExXzUiLCJlbmMiOiJBMTI4Q0JDLUhTMjU2IiwiY3R5IjoiSldU 1089 In0. 1090 g_hEwksO1Ax8Qn7HoN-BVeBoa8FXe0kpyk_XdcSmxvcM5_P296JXXtoHISr_DD_M 1091 qewaQSH4dZOQHoUgKLeFly-9RI11TG-_Ge1bZFazBPwKC5lJ6OLANLMd0QSL4fYE 1092 b9ERe-epKYE3xb2jfY1AltHqBO-PM6j23Guj2yDKnFv6WO72tteVzm_2n17SBFvh 1093 DuR9a2nHTE67pe0XGBUS_TK7ecA-iVq5COeVdJR4U4VZGGlxRGPLRHvolVLEHx6D 1094 YyLpw30Ay9R6d68YCLi9FYTq3hIXPK_-dmPlOUlKvPr1GgJzRoeC9G5qCvdcHWsq 1095 JGTO_z3Wfo5zsqwkxruxwA. 1096 UmVkbW9uZCBXQSA5ODA1Mg. 1097 VwHERHPvCNcHHpTjkoigx3_ExK0Qc71RMEParpatm0X_qpg-w8kozSjfNIPPXiTB 1098 BLXR65CIPkFqz4l1Ae9w_uowKiwyi9acgVztAi-pSL8GQSXnaamh9kX1mdh3M_TT 1099 -FZGQFQsFhu0Z72gJKGdfGE-OE7hS1zuBD5oEUfk0Dmb0VzWEzpxxiSSBbBAzP10 1100 l56pPfAtrjEYw-7ygeMkwBl6Z_mLS6w6xUgKlvW6ULmkV-uLC4FUiyKECK4e3WZY 1101 Kw1bpgIqGYsw2v_grHjszJZ-_I5uM-9RA8ycX9KqPRp9gc6pXmoU_-27ATs9XCvr 1102 ZXUtK2902AUzqpeEUJYjWWxSNsS-r1TJ1I-FMJ4XyAiGrfmo9hQPcNBYxPz3GQb2 1103 8Y5CLSQfNgKSGt0A4isp1hBUXBHAndgtcslt7ZoQJaKe_nNJgNliWtWpJ_ebuOpE 1104 l8jdhehdccnRMIwAmU1n7SPkmhIl1HlSOpvcvDfhUN5wuqU955vOBvfkBOh5A11U 1105 zBuo2WlgZ6hYi9-e3w29bR0C2-pp3jbqxEDw3iWaf2dc5b-LnR0FEYXvI_tYk5rd 1106 _J9N0mg0tQ6RbpxNEMNoA9QWk5lgdPvbh9BaO195abQ. 1107 AVO9iT5AV4CzvDJCdhSFlQ 1109 Appendix B. Relationship of JWTs to SAML Assertions 1111 SAML 2.0 [OASIS.saml-core-2.0-os] provides a standard for creating 1112 security tokens with greater expressivity and more security options 1113 than supported by JWTs. However, the cost of this flexibility and 1114 expressiveness is both size and complexity. SAML's use of XML 1115 [W3C.CR-xml11-20021015] and XML DSIG [RFC3275] contributes to the 1116 size of SAML assertions; its use of XML and especially XML 1117 Canonicalization [W3C.REC-xml-c14n-20010315] contributes to their 1118 complexity. 1120 JWTs are intended to provide a simple security token format that is 1121 small enough to fit into HTTP headers and query arguments in URIs. 1122 It does this by supporting a much simpler token model than SAML and 1123 using the JSON [RFC7159] object encoding syntax. It also supports 1124 securing tokens using Message Authentication Codes (MACs) and digital 1125 signatures using a smaller (and less flexible) format than XML DSIG. 1127 Therefore, while JWTs can do some of the things SAML assertions do, 1128 JWTs are not intended as a full replacement for SAML assertions, but 1129 rather as a token format to be used when ease of implementation or 1130 compactness are considerations. 1132 SAML Assertions are always statements made by an entity about a 1133 subject. JWTs are often used in the same manner, with the entity 1134 making the statements being represented by the "iss" (issuer) claim, 1135 and the subject being represented by the "sub" (subject) claim. 1136 However, with these claims being optional, other uses of the JWT 1137 format are also permitted. 1139 Appendix C. Relationship of JWTs to Simple Web Tokens (SWTs) 1141 Both JWTs and Simple Web Tokens SWT [SWT], at their core, enable sets 1142 of claims to be communicated between applications. For SWTs, both 1143 the claim names and claim values are strings. For JWTs, while claim 1144 names are strings, claim values can be any JSON type. Both token 1145 types offer cryptographic protection of their content: SWTs with HMAC 1146 SHA-256 and JWTs with a choice of algorithms, including signature, 1147 MAC, and encryption algorithms. 1149 Appendix D. Acknowledgements 1151 The authors acknowledge that the design of JWTs was intentionally 1152 influenced by the design and simplicity of Simple Web Tokens [SWT] 1153 and ideas for JSON tokens that Dick Hardt discussed within the OpenID 1154 community. 1156 Solutions for signing JSON content were previously explored by Magic 1157 Signatures [MagicSignatures], JSON Simple Sign [JSS], and Canvas 1158 Applications [CanvasApp], all of which influenced this draft. 1160 This specification is the work of the OAuth Working Group, which 1161 includes dozens of active and dedicated participants. In particular, 1162 the following individuals contributed ideas, feedback, and wording 1163 that influenced this specification: 1165 Dirk Balfanz, Richard Barnes, Brian Campbell, Breno de Medeiros, Dick 1166 Hardt, Joe Hildebrand, Jeff Hodges, Edmund Jay, Yaron Y. Goland, Ben 1167 Laurie, James Manger, Prateek Mishra, Tony Nadalin, Axel Nennker, 1168 John Panzer, Emmanuel Raviart, David Recordon, Eric Rescorla, Jim 1169 Schaad, Paul Tarjan, Hannes Tschofenig, and Sean Turner. 1171 Hannes Tschofenig and Derek Atkins chaired the OAuth working group 1172 and Sean Turner, Stephen Farrell, and Kathleen Moriarty served as 1173 Security area directors during the creation of this specification. 1175 Appendix E. Document History 1177 [[ to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as an RFC ]] 1179 -20 1180 o Changed the RFC 6755 reference to be normative. 1182 o Changed the JWK reference to be informative. 1184 o Described potential sources of ambiguity in representing the JSON 1185 objects used in the examples. The octets of the actual UTF-8 1186 representations of the JSON objects used in the examples are 1187 included to remove these ambiguities. 1189 o Noted that octet sequences are depicted using JSON array notation. 1191 -19 1193 o Specified that support for Nested JWTs is optional and that 1194 applications using this specification can impose additional 1195 requirements upon implementations that they use. 1197 o Updated the JSON reference to RFC 7159. 1199 -18 1201 o Clarified that the base64url encoding includes no line breaks, 1202 white space, or other additional characters. 1204 o Removed circularity in the audience claim definition. 1206 o Clarified that it is entirely up to applications which claims to 1207 use. 1209 o Changed "SHOULD" to "MUST" in "in the absence of such 1210 requirements, all claims that are not understood by 1211 implementations MUST be ignored". 1213 o Clarified that applications can define their own processing rules 1214 for claims replicated in header parameters, rather than always 1215 requiring that they be identical in the JWT Header and JWT Claims 1216 Set. 1218 o Removed a JWT creation step that duplicated a step in the 1219 underlying JWS or JWE creation. 1221 o Added security considerations about using JWTs in trust decisions. 1223 -17 1225 o Corrected RFC 2119 terminology usage. 1227 o Replaced references to draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis with RFC 7158. 1229 -16 1231 o Changed some references from being normative to informative, per 1232 JOSE issue #90. 1234 -15 1236 o Replaced references to RFC 4627 with draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis. 1238 -14 1240 o Referenced the JWE section on Distinguishing between JWS and JWE 1241 Objects. 1243 -13 1245 o Added Claim Description registry field. 1247 o Used Header Parameter Description registry field. 1249 o Removed the phrases "JWA signing algorithms" and "JWA encryption 1250 algorithms". 1252 o Removed the term JSON Text Object. 1254 -12 1256 o Tracked the JOSE change refining the "typ" and "cty" definitions 1257 to always be MIME Media Types, with the omission of "application/" 1258 prefixes recommended for brevity. For compatibility with legacy 1259 implementations, it is RECOMMENDED that "JWT" always be spelled 1260 using uppercase characters when used as a "typ" or "cty" value. 1261 As side effects, this change removed the "typ" Claim definition 1262 and narrowed the uses of the URI 1263 "urn:ietf:params:oauth:token-type:jwt". 1265 o Updated base64url definition to match JOSE definition. 1267 o Changed terminology from "Reserved Claim Name" to "Registered 1268 Claim Name" to match JOSE terminology change. 1270 o Applied other editorial changes to track parallel JOSE changes. 1272 o Clarified that the subject value may be scoped to be locally 1273 unique in the context of the issuer or may be globally unique. 1275 -11 1277 o Added a Nested JWT example. 1279 o Added "sub" to the list of Claims registered for use as Header 1280 Parameter values when an unencrypted representation is required in 1281 an encrypted JWT. 1283 -10 1285 o Allowed Claims to be replicated as Header Parameters in encrypted 1286 JWTs as needed by applications that require an unencrypted 1287 representation of specific Claims. 1289 -09 1291 o Clarified that the "typ" header parameter is used in an 1292 application-specific manner and has no effect upon the JWT 1293 processing. 1295 o Stated that recipients MUST either reject JWTs with duplicate 1296 Header Parameter Names or with duplicate Claim Names or use a JSON 1297 parser that returns only the lexically last duplicate member name. 1299 -08 1301 o Tracked a change to how JWEs are computed (which only affected the 1302 example encrypted JWT value). 1304 -07 1306 o Defined that the default action for claims that are not understood 1307 is to ignore them unless otherwise specified by applications. 1309 o Changed from using the term "byte" to "octet" when referring to 8 1310 bit values. 1312 o Tracked encryption computation changes in the JWE specification. 1314 -06 1316 o Changed the name of the "prn" claim to "sub" (subject) both to 1317 more closely align with SAML name usage and to use a more 1318 intuitive name. 1320 o Allow JWTs to have multiple audiences. 1322 o Applied editorial improvements suggested by Jeff Hodges, Prateek 1323 Mishra, and Hannes Tschofenig. Many of these simplified the 1324 terminology used. 1326 o Explained why Nested JWTs should be signed and then encrypted. 1328 o Clarified statements of the form "This claim is OPTIONAL" to "Use 1329 of this claim is OPTIONAL". 1331 o Referenced String Comparison Rules in JWS. 1333 o Added seriesInfo information to Internet Draft references. 1335 -05 1337 o Updated values for example AES CBC calculations. 1339 -04 1341 o Promoted Initialization Vector from being a header parameter to 1342 being a top-level JWE element. This saves approximately 16 bytes 1343 in the compact serialization, which is a significant savings for 1344 some use cases. Promoting the Initialization Vector out of the 1345 header also avoids repeating this shared value in the JSON 1346 serialization. 1348 o Applied changes made by the RFC Editor to RFC 6749's registry 1349 language to this specification. 1351 o Reference RFC 6755 -- An IETF URN Sub-Namespace for OAuth. 1353 -03 1355 o Added statement that "StringOrURI values are compared as case- 1356 sensitive strings with no transformations or canonicalizations 1357 applied". 1359 o Indented artwork elements to better distinguish them from the body 1360 text. 1362 -02 1364 o Added an example of an encrypted JWT. 1366 o Added this language to Registration Templates: "This name is case 1367 sensitive. Names that match other registered names in a case 1368 insensitive manner SHOULD NOT be accepted." 1370 o Applied editorial suggestions. 1372 -01 1374 o Added the "cty" (content type) header parameter for declaring type 1375 information about the secured content, as opposed to the "typ" 1376 (type) header parameter, which declares type information about 1377 this object. This significantly simplified nested JWTs. 1379 o Moved description of how to determine whether a header is for a 1380 JWS or a JWE from the JWT spec to the JWE spec. 1382 o Changed registration requirements from RFC Required to 1383 Specification Required with Expert Review. 1385 o Added Registration Template sections for defined registries. 1387 o Added Registry Contents sections to populate registry values. 1389 o Added "Collision Resistant Namespace" to the terminology section. 1391 o Numerous editorial improvements. 1393 -00 1395 o Created the initial IETF draft based upon 1396 draft-jones-json-web-token-10 with no normative changes. 1398 Authors' Addresses 1400 Michael B. Jones 1401 Microsoft 1403 Email: mbj@microsoft.com 1404 URI: http://self-issued.info/ 1406 John Bradley 1407 Ping Identity 1409 Email: ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com 1410 URI: http://www.thread-safe.com/ 1411 Nat Sakimura 1412 Nomura Research Institute 1414 Email: n-sakimura@nri.co.jp 1415 URI: http://nat.sakimura.org/