• Slotos@feddit.nlEnglish
    11·
    4 days ago

    https://oauth.net/articles/authentication/

    That aside, why is nextcloud asking for scopes from remote API in the diagram? What is drawn on the diagram has little to do with OAuth scopes, but rather looks like an attempt to wrap ACL repository access into a new vocabulary.

    Scopes issued by the OAuth authorization server can be hidden entirely. The issuer doesn’t hold any obligation to share them with authorized party since they are dedicated for internal use and can be propagated via invisible or opaque means.

    I really can’t figure out what’s going on with that diagram.

      • Slotos@feddit.nlEnglish
        1·
        13 hours ago

        I’d probably add that for something like nextcloud granted scopes can be an „orthogonal”–for the lack of a better word–subset of requested scopes.

        The set of requestable scopes has to be defined by the system itself, not its specific configuration. E.g. „files:manage”, „talk:manage”, „mail:read” are all general capabilities the system offers.

        However, as a user I can have a local configuration that adds granularity to the grants I issue. E.g.: „files:manage in specific folders” or „mail:read for specific domains or groups only” are user trust statements that fit into the capability matrix but add an additional and preferably invisible layer of access control.

        It’s a fairly rare feature in the wild and is a potential UX pitfall, but it can be useful as an advanced option on the grant page, or as a separate access control for issued grants.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netEnglish
      1·
      4 days ago

      The email address scope is commonly used as a shared identifyer for linking accounts.

    • chonkyninja@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      4 days ago

      Thank you for answering this person, it amazes me how little people know of oauth, and it’s not a new tech.