-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 729
Implement RFC 9207 issuer validation in ClientOAuthProvider #1605
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
mikekistler
wants to merge
4
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
sep-2468-iss-validation
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0bb5fb7
Implement RFC 9207 issuer validation in ClientOAuthProvider
mikekistler 83f95f4
Skip RFC 8414 issuer validation in legacy 2025-03-26 backcompat path
mikekistler cfadb00
Merge origin/main into sep-2468-iss-validation
mikekistler 5fa4edf
Merge branch 'main' into sep-2468-iss-validation
mikekistler File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
39 changes: 39 additions & 0 deletions
39
src/ModelContextProtocol.Core/Authentication/AuthorizationResult.cs
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ | ||
| namespace ModelContextProtocol.Authentication; | ||
|
|
||
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// Represents the result of an OAuth authorization redirect, containing the authorization code | ||
| /// and optionally the issuer identifier from the authorization response. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| /// <remarks> | ||
| /// <para> | ||
| /// The <see cref="Iss"/> property should be populated from the <c>iss</c> query parameter in the | ||
| /// redirect URI when present, as specified by | ||
| /// <see href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9207">RFC 9207</see>. | ||
| /// This enables the SDK to validate that the authorization response originated from the expected | ||
| /// authorization server, mitigating mix-up attacks. | ||
| /// </para> | ||
| /// </remarks> | ||
| public sealed class AuthorizationResult | ||
| { | ||
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// Gets the authorization code returned by the authorization server. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| public string? Code { get; init; } | ||
|
|
||
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// Gets the issuer identifier returned in the authorization response per | ||
| /// <see href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9207">RFC 9207</see>. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| /// <remarks> | ||
| /// <para> | ||
| /// This value should be extracted from the <c>iss</c> query parameter of the redirect URI. | ||
| /// When present, the SDK validates it against the expected authorization server issuer to | ||
| /// prevent mix-up attacks. | ||
| /// </para> | ||
| /// <para> | ||
| /// Implementations of <see cref="ClientOAuthOptions.AuthorizationCallbackHandler"/> should populate this property | ||
| /// whenever the <c>iss</c> parameter is present in the redirect URI callback. | ||
| /// </para> | ||
| /// </remarks> | ||
| public string? Iss { get; init; } | ||
| } |
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given that this is going to be new in new major version, 2.0, I'd almost take a breaking change to
AuthorizationRedirectDelegateover a mutually exclusive new callback. If we like the new name better, maybe justObsoletetheAuthorizationRedirectDelegateproperty and type?Also, while I usually lean towards liking
Funcs over custom delegate types, I think it's useful when there's multiple parameters of the same type likeUri. I'm also wondering if we shouldn't take a context object instead to avoid future breaking changes. Then maybe we could stick with theFunc.