<?xml version="1.0"encoding="utf-8"?> <!-- name="GENERATOR" content="github.com/mmarkdown/mmark Mmark Markdown Processor - mmark.miek.nl" -->encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE rfc [ <!ENTITY nbsp " "> <!ENTITY zwsp "​"> <!ENTITY nbhy "‑"> <!ENTITY wj "⁠"> ]> <rfc version="3" ipr="trust200902"docName="draft-ietf-oauth-rar-22"docName="draft-ietf-oauth-rar-23" number="9396" submissionType="IETF" category="std" consensus="true" xml:lang="en" xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"indexInclude="true" consensus="true">tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" updates="" obsoletes="" indexInclude="true"> <front> <titleabbrev="oauth-rar">OAuthabbrev="OAuth-RAR">OAuth 2.0 Rich AuthorizationRequests</title><seriesInfo value="draft-ietf-oauth-rar-22" stream="IETF" status="standard" name="Internet-Draft"></seriesInfo>Requests</title> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9396"/> <author initials="T." surname="Lodderstedt" fullname="TorstenLodderstedt"><organization>yes.com</organization><address><postal><street></street> </postal><email>torsten@lodderstedt.net</email> </address></author><authorLodderstedt"> <organization>yes.com</organization><address><postal><street></street> </postal><email>torsten@lodderstedt.net</email></address></author> <author initials="J." surname="Richer" fullname="JustinRicher"><organization>BespokeRicher"> <organization>Bespoke Engineering</organization><address><postal><street></street></postal><email>ietf@justin.richer.org</email> </address></author><author</postal><email>ietf@justin.richer.org</email></address></author> <author initials="B." surname="Campbell" fullname="BrianCampbell"><organization>PingCampbell"> <organization>Ping Identity</organization><address><postal><street></street></postal><email>bcampbell@pingidentity.com</email> </address></author><date/> <area>Security</area> <workgroup>Web Authorization Protocol</workgroup></postal><email>bcampbell@pingidentity.com</email></address></author> <date year="2023" month="May" /> <area>sec</area> <workgroup>oauth</workgroup> <keyword>security</keyword> <keyword>oauth2</keyword> <abstract> <t>This document specifies a new parameter <tt>authorization_details</tt> that is used to carry fine-grained authorization data in OAuth messages.</t> </abstract> </front> <middle> <section anchor="Introduction"><name>Introduction</name><t>The<t>"The OAuth 2.0authorization frameworkAuthorization Framework" <xref target="RFC6749"></xref> defines the <tt>scope</tt> parameter that allows OAuth clients to specify the requested scope, i.e., the limited capability, of an access token. This mechanism is sufficient to implement static scenarios and coarse-grained authorization requests, such as"give"give me read access to the resource owner'sprofile" butprofile." However, it is not sufficient to specify fine-grained authorization requirements, such as"please"please let me transfer an amount of 45 Euros to MerchantA"A" or"please"please give me read access to directory A and write access to fileX".</t>X."</t> <t>This specification introduces a new parameter <tt>authorization_details</tt> that allows clients to specify their fine-grained authorization requirements using the expressiveness of JSON <xref target="RFC8259"></xref> data structures.</t> <t>For example, an authorization request for a credit transfer (designated as"payment initiation""payment initiation" in several open banking initiatives) can be represented using a JSON object like this:</t> <figure><name>Exampleauthorization requestof an Authorization Request for acredit transfer.Credit Transfer </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{ "type": "payment_initiation", "locations": [ "https://example.com/payments" ], "instructedAmount": { "currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50"type="json">{ "type": "payment_initiation", "locations": [ "https://example.com/payments" ], "instructedAmount": { "currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": { "bic":"ABCIDEFFXXX", "iban": "DE02100100109307118603""creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": { "bic":"ABCIDEFFXXX", "iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } </sourcecode> </figure> <t>This object contains detailed information about the intended payment, such as amount, currency, and creditor, thatareis required to inform the user and obtain their consent. The authorization server (AS) and the respective resource server (RS) (providing the payment initiation API) will together enforce this consent.</t> <t>For a comprehensive discussion of the challenges arising from new use cases in the open banking and electronic signingspacesspaces, see <xreftarget="transaction-authorization"></xref>.</t>target="Transaction-Auth"></xref>.</t> <t>In addition to facilitating custom authorization requests, this specification also introduces a set of common data type fields for use across different APIs.</t> <section anchor="conventions-and-terminology"><name>Conventions and Terminology</name><t>The<t> The key words"MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY","<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and"OPTIONAL""<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as described inBCP 14BCP 14 <xreftarget="RFC2119"></xref>target="RFC2119"/> <xreftarget="RFC8174"></xref>target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shownhere.</t>here. </t> <t>This specification uses the terms"access token", "refresh token", "authorization server", "resource server", "authorization endpoint", "authorization request", "authorization response", "token endpoint", "grant type", "access"access token", "refresh token", "authorization server" (AS), "resource server" (RS), "authorization endpoint", "authorization request", "authorization response", "token endpoint", "grant type", "access tokenrequest", "accessrequest", "access tokenresponse",response", and"client""client" defined byThe OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework"<xref target="RFC6749" format="title"/>" <xreftarget="RFC6749"></xref>.</t>target="RFC6749" format="default"/>.</t> </section> </section> <section anchor="authz_details"><name>Requestparameter "authorization_details"</name>Parameter "authorization_details"</name> <t>The request parameter <tt>authorization_details</tt> contains, in JSON notation, an array of objects. Each JSON object contains the data to specify the authorization requirements for a certain type of resource. The type of resource or access requirement is determined by the <tt>type</tt> field, which is defined as follows:</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt><tt>type</tt>:</dt> <dd>An identifier for the authorization details type as a string. The value of the <tt>type</tt> field determines the allowable contents of the objectwhichthat containsit andit. The value is unique for the described API in the context of the AS. This field isREQUIRED.</dd><bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>.</dd> </dl> <t>An <tt>authorization_details</tt> arrayMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> contain multiple entries of the same <tt>type</tt>.</t><t>This example<t><xref target="figure2"></xref> shows an <tt>authorization_details</tt> of type <tt>payment_initiation</tt> using the example data shown above:</t><figure><name>Example <tt>authorization_details</tt><figure anchor="figure2"><name>Example of "authorization_details" for acredit transfer.Credit Transfer </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ] </sourcecode> </figure><t>This example<t><xref target="figure3"></xref> shows a combined request asking for access to account information and permission to initiate a payment:</t><figure><name>Example <tt>authorization_details</tt><figure anchor="figure3"><name>Example of "authorization_details" for acombined request.Combined Request </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "account_information", "actions":"type": "account_information", "actions": ["list_accounts", "read_balances", "read_transactions""list_accounts", "read_balances", "read_transactions" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/accounts""https://example.com/accounts" ] }, {"type": "payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The JSON objects with <tt>type</tt> fields of <tt>account_information</tt> and <tt>payment_initiation</tt> represent the different <tt>authorization_details</tt> to be used by the AS to ask for consent.</t><t>Note:<aside><t>Note: The AS will make this data subsequently available to the respectiveresource serversRSs (see <xreftarget="resource_servers"></xref>).</t>target="resource_servers"></xref>).</t></aside> <section anchor="authorization-details-types"><name>Authorization Details Types</name><t>Interpretation<t>The AS controls the interpretation of the value of the <tt>type</tt>parameter, andparameter as well as the object fields that the <tt>type</tt> parameterallows, is under the control of the AS.allows. However, the value of the <tt>type</tt> parameter is also generally documented and intended to be used bydevelopers, itdevelopers. It isRECOMMENDED<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> that API designers choose <tt>type</tt> values that are easily copied without ambiguity. For example, some glyphs have multiple Unicode code points for the same visual character, and a developer could potentially type a different character than what the AS has defined. Possible means of reducing potential confusion are limiting the value to ASCII <xref target="RFC0020"></xref> characters, providing a machine-readable listing of data type values, or instructing developers to copy and paste directly from the documentation.</t> <t>If an application or API is expected to be deployed across different servers, such as the case in an open standard, the API designer isRECOMMENDED<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> to use a collision-resistant namespace under their control, such as a URI that the API designer controls.</t> <t>The following example shows how an implementation could utilize the namespace <tt>https://scheme.example.org/</tt> to ensure collision-resistant type values.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt>of "authorization_details" with a URL astype identifier.Type Identifier </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{ "type": "https://scheme.example.org/files", "locations":type="json">{ "type": "https://scheme.example.org/files", "locations": ["https://example.com/files""https://example.com/files" ],"permissions":"permissions": [ {"path": "/myfiles/A", "access":"path": "/myfiles/A", "access": ["read""read" ] }, {"path": "/myfiles/A/X", "access":"path": "/myfiles/A/X", "access": ["read", "write""read", "write" ] } ] } </sourcecode> </figure> </section> <section anchor="common_data_fields"><name>Commondata fields</name>Data Fields</name> <t>This specification defines a set of common data fields that are designed to be usable across different types of APIs. This specification does not require the use of these common fields by an APIdefinition, but insteaddefinition but, instead, provides them as reusable generic components for API designers to make use of. The allowable values of all fields are determined by the API being protected, as defined by a particular"type""type" value.</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt><tt>locations</tt>:</dt> <dd>An array of strings representing the location of the resource orresource server.RS. These strings are typically URIs identifying the location of the RS. This field can allow a client to specify a particular RS, as discussed in <xref target="security_considerations"></xref>.</dd> <dt><tt>actions</tt>:</dt> <dd>An array of strings representing the kinds of actions to be taken at the resource.</dd> <dt><tt>datatypes</tt>:</dt> <dd>An array of strings representing the kinds of data being requested from the resource.</dd> <dt><tt>identifier</tt>:</dt> <dd>A string identifier indicating a specific resource available at the API.</dd> <dt><tt>privileges</tt>:</dt> <dd>An array of strings representing the types or levels of privilege being requested at the resource.</dd> </dl> <t>When different common data fields are used in combination, the permissions the client requests are the product of all the values. The object represents a request for all<tt>action</tt><tt>actions</tt> values listed within the object to be used at all <tt>locations</tt> values listed within the object for all<tt>datatype</tt><tt>datatypes</tt> values listed within the object. In the following example, the client is requesting <tt>read</tt> and <tt>write</tt> access to both the <tt>contacts</tt> and <tt>photos</tt> belonging to customers in a <tt>customer_information</tt> API. If this request is granted, the client would assume it would be able to use any combination of rights defined by the API, such asreadingread access to the photos andwritingwrite access to the contacts.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt>of "authorization_details" withcommon data fields.Common Data Fields </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "customer_information", "locations":"type": "customer_information", "locations": ["https://example.com/customers""https://example.com/customers" ],"actions":"actions": ["read", "write""read", "write" ],"datatypes":"datatypes": ["contacts", "photos""contacts", "photos" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>If the client wishes to have finer control over its access, it can send multiple objects. In this example, the client is asking for <tt>read</tt> access to the <tt>contacts</tt> and <tt>write</tt> access to the <tt>photos</tt> in the same API endpoint. If this request is granted, the client would not be able to write to the contacts.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt>of "authorization_details" withcommon data fieldsCommon Data Fields inmultiple objects.Multiple Objects </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "customer_information", "locations":"type": "customer_information", "locations": ["https://example.com/customers""https://example.com/customers" ],"actions":"actions": ["read""read" ],"datatypes":"datatypes": ["contacts""contacts" ] }, {"type": "customer_information", "locations":"type": "customer_information", "locations": ["https://example.com/customers""https://example.com/customers" ],"actions":"actions": ["write""write" ],"datatypes":"datatypes": ["photos""photos" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>An APIMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> define its own extensions, subject to the <tt>type</tt> of the respective authorization object. It is anticipated that API designers will use a combination of common data fields defined in this specification as well as fields specific to the API itself. The following non-normative example shows the use of both common and API-specific fields as part of two different fictitious API <tt>type</tt> values. The first access request includes the <tt>actions</tt>, <tt>locations</tt>, and <tt>datatypes</tt> fields specified here as well as the API-specific <tt>geolocation</tt> field, indicating access to photos taken at the given coordinates. The second access request includes the <tt>actions</tt> and <tt>identifier</tt> fields specified here as well as the API-specific <tt>currency</tt> fields.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt> using common and extension data fields. </name>of "authorization_details" Using Common and Extension Data Fields</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type":"photo-api", "actions":[ "read", "write""type":"photo-api", "actions":[ "read", "write" ], "locations":[ "https://server.example.net/", "https://resource.local/other" ], "datatypes":[ "metadata", "images" ],"locations":[ "https://server.example.net/", "https://resource.local/other" ], "datatypes":[ "metadata", "images" ], "geolocation":["geolocation":[ {"lat":-32.364, "lng":153.207"lat":-32.364, "lng":153.207 }, {"lat":-35.364, "lng":158.207"lat":-35.364, "lng":158.207 } ] }, {"type":"financial-transaction", "actions":[ "withdraw""type":"financial-transaction", "actions":[ "withdraw" ],"identifier":"account-14-32-32-3", "currency":"USD""identifier":"account-14-32-32-3", "currency":"USD" } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>If this request is approved, the resulting access token's access rights will be the union of the requested types of access for each of the two APIs, just as above.</t> </section> </section> <section anchor="authz_request"><name>Authorization Request</name> <t>The <tt>authorization_details</tt> authorization request parameter can be used to specify authorization requirements in all places where the <tt>scope</tt> parameter is used for the same purpose, examples include:</t> <ulspacing="compact"> <li>Authorizationspacing="normal"> <li>authorization requests as specified in <xreftarget="RFC6749"></xref>,</li> <li>Device Authorization Requesttarget="RFC6749"></xref></li> <li>device authorization requests as specified in <xreftarget="RFC8628"></xref>,</li> <li>Backchannel Authentication Requeststarget="RFC8628"></xref></li> <li>backchannel authentication requests as defined in <xreftarget="OpenID.CIBA"></xref>.</li>target="OID-CIBA"></xref></li> </ul> <t>In case of authorization requests as defined in <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>,implementors MAYimplementers <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> consider using pushed authorization requests <xref target="RFC9126"></xref> to improve the security, privacy, and reliability of the flow. See Sections <xreftarget="security_considerations"></xref>,target="security_considerations" format="counter"></xref>, <xreftarget="privacy_considerations"></xref>,target="privacy_considerations" format="counter"></xref>, and <xreftarget="large_requests"></xref>target="large_requests" format="counter"></xref> for details.</t> <t>Parameter encoding is determined by the respective context. In the context of an authorization request according to <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>, the parameter is encoded using the <tt>application/x-www-form-urlencoded</tt> format of the serialized JSON as shown inthe following<xref target="fig8" format="default"/>, using the example from <xref target="authz_details"></xref> (line breaks for display purposes only):</t><figure><name>Example authorization request<figure anchor="fig8"><name>Example of Authorization Request withauthorization_details. </name> <artwork>GET"authorization_details"</name> <sourcecode type="http-message"><![CDATA[ GET /authorize?response_type=code&client_id=s6BhdRkqt3 &state=af0ifjsldkj &redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fclient.example.org%2Fcb &code_challenge_method=S256 &code_challenge=K2-ltc83acc4h0c9w6ESC_rEMTJ3bwc-uCHaoeK1t8U &authorization_details=%5B%7B%22type%22%3A%22account%5Finfo&client_id=s6BhdRkqt3 &state=af0ifjsldkj &redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fclient.example.org%2Fcb &code_challenge_method=S256 &code_challenge=K2-ltc83acc4h0c9w6ESC_rEMTJ3bwc-uCHaoeK1t8U &authorization_details=%5B%7B%22type%22%3A%22account%5Finfo rmation%22%2C%22actions%22%3A%5B%22list%5Faccounts%22%2C%22 read%5Fbalances%22%2C%22read%5Ftransactions%22%5D%2C%22loca tions%22%3A%5B%22https%3A%2F%2Fexample%2Ecom%2Faccounts%22% 5D%7D%2C%7B%22type%22%3A%22payment%5Finitiation%22%2C%22act ions%22%3A%5B%22initiate%22%2C%22status%22%2C%22cancel%22%5 D%2C%22locations%22%3A%5B%22https%3A%2F%2Fexample%2Ecom%2Fp ayments%22%5D%2C%22instructedAmount%22%3A%7B%22currency%22% 3A%22EUR%22%2C%22amount%22%3A%22123%2E50%22%7D%2C%22creditorName%22%3A%22Merchant%20A%22%2C%22creditorAccount%22%3A%7B% 22iban%22%3A%22DE02100100109307118603%22%7D%2C%22remittance InformationUnstructured%22%3A%22RefNumberMerchant%22%7D%5DrName%22%3A%22Merchant%20A%22%2C%22creditorAccount%22%3A%7B %22iban%22%3A%22DE02100100109307118603%22%7D%2C%22remittanc eInformationUnstructured%22%3A%22Ref%20Number%20Merchant%22 %7D%5D HTTP/1.1 Host: server.example.com</artwork>]]></sourcecode> </figure> <t>Based on the data provided in the <tt>authorization_details</tt>parameterparameter, the AS will ask the user for consent to the requested access permissions.</t><t>Note: the<aside><t>Note: The user may also grant a subset of the requested authorizationdetails.</t>details.</t></aside> <t>Inthis example,<xref target="fig9" format="default"/>, the client wants to get access to account information and initiate a payment:</t><figure><name>URL decoded <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name><figure anchor="fig9"><name>URL Decoded "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "account_information", "actions":"type": "account_information", "actions": ["list_accounts", "read_balances", "read_transactions""list_accounts", "read_balances", "read_transactions" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/accounts""https://example.com/accounts" ] }, {"type": "payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <section anchor="scope"><name>Relationship to"scope" parameter</name>the "scope" Parameter</name> <t><tt>authorization_details</tt> and <tt>scope</tt> can be used in the same authorization request for carrying independent authorization requirements.</t> <t>Combined use of <tt>authorization_details</tt> and <tt>scope</tt> is supported by this specification in part to allow existing OAuth-based applications to incrementally migrate towards using <tt>authorization_details</tt> exclusively. It isRECOMMENDED<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> that a given API use only one form of requirement specification.</t> <t>The ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> process both sets of requirements in combination with each other for the given authorization request. The details of how the AS combines these parameters are specific to the APIs being protected and outside the scope of this specification.</t> <t>When gathering user consent, the ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> present the merged set of requirements represented by the authorization request.</t> <t>If the resource owner grants the client the requested access, the AS will issue tokens to the client that are associated with the respective <tt>authorization_details</tt> (and scope values, if applicable).</t> </section> <section anchor="relationship-to-resource-parameter"><name>Relationship to"resource" parameter</name>the "resource" Parameter</name> <t>The <tt>resource</tt> authorization requestparameterparameter, as defined in <xreftarget="RFC8707"></xref>target="RFC8707"></xref>, can be used to further determine the resources where the requested scope can be applied. The <tt>resource</tt> parameter does not have any impact on the way the AS processes the <tt>authorization_details</tt> authorization request parameter.</t> </section> </section> <section anchor="authorization-response"><name>Authorization Response</name> <t>This specification does not define extensions to the authorization response.</t> </section> <section anchor="authz_details_error"><name>Authorization Error Response</name> <t>The ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> refuse to process any unknown authorization details type or authorization details not conforming to the respective type definition. The ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> abort processing and respond with an error <tt>invalid_authorization_details</tt> to the client if any of the following are true of the objects in the <tt>authorization_details</tt> structure:</t> <ulspacing="compact"> <li>Containsspacing="normal"> <li>contains an unknown authorization details type value,</li><li>An<li>is an object of known type but containing unknown fields,</li><li>Contains<li>contains fields of the wrong type for the authorization details type,</li><li>Contains<li>contains fields with invalid values for the authorization details type, or</li><li>Missing<li>is missing required fields for the authorization details type.</li> </ul> </section> <section anchor="token-request"><name>Token Request</name> <t>The <tt>authorization_details</tt> token request parameter can be used to specify the authorization details that a client wants the AS to assign to an access token. The AS checks whether the underlying grant (in case of grant types <tt>authorization_code</tt>, <tt>refresh_token</tt>,...)etc.) or the client's policy (in case of grant type<tt>client_credential</tt>)<tt>client_credentials</tt>) allows the issuance of an access token with the requested authorization details. Otherwise, the AS refuses the request with the error code <tt>invalid_authorization_details</tt> (similar to <tt>invalid_scope</tt>).</t> <section anchor="comparing-authorization-details"><name>Comparingauthorization details</name>Authorization Details</name> <t>Many actions in the OAuth protocol allow the AS and RS to make security decisions based on whether the request is asking for"more""more" or"less""less" than a previous, existing request. For example, upon refreshing a token, the client can ask for a new access token with"fewer permissions""fewer permissions" than had been previously authorized by the resource owner. The requested access token will convey the reducedpermissionspermissions, but the resource owner's previous authorization is unchanged by such requests. Since the semantics of the fields in the <tt>authorization_details</tt> will be implementation specific to a given API or set of APIs, there is no standardized mechanism to compare two arbitrary authorization detail requests.Authorization serversAn AS should not rely on simple object comparison in most cases, as the intersection of some fields within a request could have side effects on the access rights granted, depending on how the API has been designed and deployed. This is a similar effect to the scope values used with some APIs.</t> <t>When comparing a new request to an existing request,authorization serversan AS can use the same processing techniques as used in granting the request in the first place to determine if a resource owner needs to authorize the request. The details of this comparison are dependent on the definition of the <tt>type</tt> of authorization request and outside the scope of this specification, but common patterns can be applied.</t> <t>This shall be illustrated using our running example. The example authorization request in <xref target="authz_request"></xref>, if approved by the user, resulted in the issuance of an authorization code associated with the privilegesto</t>to:</t> <ulspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <li>listaccounts</li>accounts,</li> <li>access the balance of one or more accounts,</li> <li>access the transactions of one or more accounts, and</li><li>to initiate,<li>initiate, check the status of, and cancel a payment.</li> </ul> <t>The client could now request the AS to issue an access token assigned with the privilege to just access a list of accounts as follows:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt> reduced privileges.of "authorization_details" Reduced Privileges </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "account_information", "actions":"type": "account_information", "actions": ["list_accounts""list_accounts" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/accounts""https://example.com/accounts" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The example API is designed such that each field used by the <tt>account_information</tt> type contains additive rights, with each value within the <tt>actions</tt> and <tt>locations</tt> arrays specifying a different element of access. To make a comparison in this instance, the AS would perform the following steps:</t> <ulspacing="compact"> <li>comparespacing="normal"> <li>verify that the authorization code issued in the previous step contains an authorization details object of type<tt>account_information</tt></li> <li>compare<tt>account_information</tt>,</li> <li>verify whether the approved list of actions contains<tt>list_account</tt>,<tt>list_accounts</tt>, and</li><li>whether<li>verify whether the <tt>locations</tt> value includes onlypreviously-approvedpreviously approved locations.</li> </ul> <t>If all checks succeed, the AS would issue the requested access token with the reduced set of access.</t> <t>Note that this comparison is relevant to this specific API type definition. A different API type definition could have different processing rules. For example,the value ofan<tt>action</tt><tt>actions</tt> value could subsume the rights associated with another<tt>action</tt><tt>actions</tt> value. For example, if a client initially asks for a token with <tt>write</tt> access,whichthis implies both read and write access to this API:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt> requesting "write" accessof "authorization_details" Requesting "write" Access to anAPI. </name>API</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "example_api", "actions":"type": "example_api", "actions": ["write""write" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure><t>Later<t>Later, that same client makes a refresh request for <tt>read</tt> access:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt> requesting "read" accessof "authorization_details" Requesting "read" Access to anAPI.API </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "example_api", "actions":"type": "example_api", "actions": ["read""read" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The AS would compare the <tt>type</tt> value and the<tt>action</tt><tt>actions</tt> value to determine that the <tt>read</tt> access is already covered by the <tt>write</tt> access previously granted to the client.</t> <t>This same API could be designed with a possible value for <tt>privileges</tt> of <tt>admin</tt>, used in this example to denote that the resulting token is allowed to perform any of the functions on the resources. If that client is then granted such <tt>admin</tt> privileges to theAPI:</t> <figure><name>Example forAPI, the <tt>authorization_details</tt>requesting "admin" accesswould be as follows: </t> <figure><name>Example of "authorization_details" with "admin" Access to anAPI.API </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "example_api", "privileges":"type": "example_api", "privileges": ["admin""admin" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The AS would compare the <tt>type</tt> value and find that the <tt>privileges</tt> value subsumes any aspects of <tt>read</tt> or <tt>write</tt> access that had been granted to the client previously. Note that other API definitions can use <tt>privileges</tt> such that values do not subsume one another.</t> <t>The next example shows how the client can use the common data element <tt>locations</tt> (see <xref target="common_data_fields"></xref>) to request the issuance of an access token restricted to a certainresource server.RS. In our running example, the client may ask for all permissions of the approved grant of type<tt>payment_iniation</tt><tt>payment_initiation</tt> applicable to theresource serverRS residing at <tt>https://example.com/payments</tt> as follows:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt> requestingof "authorization_details" Requesting anaudience restricted access token.Audience-Restricted Access Token </name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json">[ {"type": "payment_initiation", "locations":"type": "payment_initiation", "locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure> </section> </section> <section anchor="token-response"><name>Token Response</name> <t>In addition to the token response parameters as defined in <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>, theauthorization server MUSTAS <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> also return the <tt>authorization_details</tt> as granted by the resource owner and assigned to the respective access token.</t> <t>The authorization details assigned to the access token issued in a token response are determined by the <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter of the corresponding token request. If the client does not specify the <tt>authorization_details</tt> token request parameters, the AS determines the resulting <tt>authorization_details</tt> at its discretion.</t> <t>The ASMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> omit values in the <tt>authorization_details</tt> to the client.</t> <t>For our running example,thisit would look like this:</t> <figure><name>Exampletoken response. </name>Token Response</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">HTTP/1.1type="http-message"> HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/json Cache-Control: no-store {"access_token": "2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type": "example", "expires_in":"access_token": "2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type": "example", "expires_in": 3600,"refresh_token": "tGzv3JOkF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details":"refresh_token": "tGzv3JOkF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details": [ {"type": "payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ] } </sourcecode> </figure> <section anchor="enriched-authorization-details-in-token-response"><name>Enrichedauthorization detailsAuthorization Details in Token Response</name> <t>The authorization details attached to the access tokenMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> differ from what the client requests. In addition to the user authorizing less than what the client requested, there are some use cases where theauthorization serverAS enriches the data in an authorization details object. Whether enrichment is allowed and specifics of how it works are necessarily part of the definition of the respective authorization details type.</t> <t>As one example, a client may ask for access to account information but leave the decision about the specific accounts it will be able to access to the user.The user would, duringDuring the course of the authorization process, the user would select the subset of their accounts that they want to allow the client to access. As one design option to convey the selected accounts, theauthorization serverAS could add this information to the respective authorization details object.</t> <t>In that example, the requestedauthorization detail<tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter might look like the following. In thisexampleexample, the empty arrays serve as placeholders for where data will be added during enrichment by the AS. This example is illustrative only and is not intended to suggest a preference for designing the specifics of any authorization details type this way.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor requested <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>of Requested "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">"authorization_details":type="json">"authorization_details": [ {"type": "account_information", "access":"type": "account_information", "access": {"accounts":"accounts": [],"balances":"balances": [],"transactions":"transactions": [] },"recurringIndicator":true"recurringIndicator":true } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>Theauthorization serverAS then would expand the authorization details object and add the respective account identifiers.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor enriched <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>of Enriched "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">HTTP/1.1type="http-message"> HTTP/1.1 200 OK Content-Type: application/json Cache-Control: no-store {"access_token":"2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type":"example", "expires_in":3600, "refresh_token":"tGzv3JokF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details":[ { "type":"account_information", "access":{ "accounts":["access_token":"2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type":"example", "expires_in":3600, "refresh_token":"tGzv3JokF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details":[ { "type":"account_information", "access":{ "accounts":[ {"iban":"DE2310010010123456789""iban":"DE2310010010123456789" }, {"maskedPan":"123456xxxxxx1234""maskedPan":"123456xxxxxx1234" } ],"balances":["balances":[ {"iban":"DE2310010010123456789""iban":"DE2310010010123456789" } ],"transactions":["transactions":[ {"iban":"DE2310010010123456789""iban":"DE2310010010123456789" }, {"maskedPan":"123456xxxxxx1234""maskedPan":"123456xxxxxx1234" } ] },"recurringIndicator":true"recurringIndicator":true } ] } </sourcecode> </figure> <t>For another example, the client is asking for access to a medical record but does not know the record number at request time. In this example, the client specifies the type of access it wants but doesn't specify the location or identifier of that access.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor requested <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>of Requested "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{ "authorization_details":type="json">{ "authorization_details": [ {"type": "medical_record", "sens":"type": "medical_record", "sens": ["HIV", "ETH", "MART""HIV", "ETH", "MART" ],"actions":"actions": ["read""read" ],"datatypes":"datatypes": ["Patient", "Observation", "Appointment""Patient", "Observation", "Appointment" ] } ]} </sourcecode> </figure> <t>When the user interacts with the AS, they select which of the medical records they are responsible for giving to the client. This information gets returned with the access token.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor enriched <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>of Enriched "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{ "access_token":"2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type":"example", "expires_in":3600, "refresh_token":"tGzv3JokF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details":[type="json">{ "access_token":"2YotnFZFEjr1zCsicMWpAA", "token_type":"example", "expires_in":3600, "refresh_token":"tGzv3JokF0XG5Qx2TlKWIA", "authorization_details":[ {"type": "medical_record", "sens":"type": "medical_record", "sens": ["HIV", "ETH", "MART""HIV", "ETH", "MART" ],"actions":"actions": ["read""read" ],"datatypes":"datatypes": ["Patient", "Observation", "Appointment""Patient", "Observation", "Appointment" ],"identifier": "patient-541235", "locations":"identifier": "patient-541235", "locations": ["https://records.example.com/""https://records.example.com/" ] } ] } </sourcecode> </figure><t>Note: the<aside><t>Note: The client needs to be aware upfront of the possibility that a certain authorization details object can be enriched. It is assumed that this property is part of the definition of the respective authorization detailstype.</t>type.</t></aside> </section> </section> <section anchor="token-error-response"><name>Token Error Response</name> <t>The Token Error ResponseMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> conform to the rules given in <xref target="authz_details_error"></xref>.</t> </section> <section anchor="resource_servers"><name>Resource Servers</name> <t>In order to enable the RS to enforce the authorization details as approved in the authorization process, the ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> make this data available to the RS. The ASMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> add the <tt>authorization_details</tt> field to access tokens inJWTJSON Web Token (JWT) format or toToken Introspectiontoken introspection responses.</t> <sectionanchor="jwt_based_access_tokens"><name>JWT-basedanchor="jwt_based_access_tokens"><name>JWT-Based Access Tokens</name> <t>If the access token is a JWT <xref target="RFC7519"></xref>, the AS isRECOMMENDED<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> to add the<tt>authorization_details</tt>authorization details object, filtered to the specific audience, as a top-level claim.</t> <t>The AS will typically also add further claims to the JWT that the RS requiresforrequest processing, e.g., userid,ID, roles, and transaction-specific data. What claims the particular RS requires is defined by the RS-specific policy with the AS.</t> <t>The following shows the contents of an example JWT for the payment initiation example above:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt>of "authorization_details" inJWT-based access token. </name>JWT-Based Access Token</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{ "iss": "https://as.example.com", "sub": "24400320", "aud": "a7AfcPcsl2", "exp":type="json">{ "iss": "https://as.example.com", "sub": "24400320", "aud": "a7AfcPcsl2", "exp": 1311281970,"acr": "psd2_sca", "txn": "8b4729cc-32e4-4370-8cf0-5796154d1296", "authorization_details":"acr": "psd2_sca", "txn": "8b4729cc-32e4-4370-8cf0-5796154d1296", "authorization_details": [ {"type": "https://scheme.example.com/payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "https://scheme.example.com/payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant A", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ],"debtorAccount":"debtorAccount": {"iban": "DE40100100103307118608", "user_role": "owner""iban": "DE40100100103307118608", "user_role": "owner" } } </sourcecode> </figure> <t>In this case, the AS added the following example claims to the JWT-based access token:</t><ul spacing="compact"> <li><tt>sub</tt>: conveys<dl spacing="normal" newline="false"> <dt><tt>sub</tt>:</dt> <dd>indicates the useronfor whichbehalfthe client is asking for paymentinitiation</li> <li><tt>txn</tt>: transactioninitiation.</dd> <dt><tt>txn</tt>:</dt> <dd>transaction id used to trace the transaction across the services of provider<tt>example.com</tt></li> <li><tt>debtorAccount</tt>: API-specific<tt>example.com</tt></dd> <dt><tt>debtorAccount</tt>:</dt> <dd>API-specific field containing the debtor account. In the example, this account was not passed in the <tt>authorization_details</tt> but was selected by the user during the authorization process. The field <tt>user_role</tt> conveys the role the user has with respect to this particular account. In this case, they are the owner. This data is used for access control at the payment API (theRS).</li> </ul>RS).</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="token_introspection"><name>Token Introspection</name> <t>Token introspection <xref target="RFC7662"></xref> provides a means for an RS to query the AS to determine information about an access token. If the AS includes authorization detail information for the token in its response, the informationMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be conveyed with <tt>authorization_details</tt> as a top-level member of the introspection response JSON object. The <tt>authorization_details</tt> memberMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> contain the same structure defined in <xref target="authz_details"></xref>, potentially filtered and extended for the RS making the introspection request.</t> <t>Here is an example introspection response for the payment initiation example:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor <tt>authorization_details</tt>of "authorization_details" inintrospection response. </name>Introspection Response</name> <sourcecode type="json">{"active":"active": true,"sub": "24400320", "aud": "s6BhdRkqt3", "exp":"sub": "24400320", "aud": "s6BhdRkqt3", "exp": 1311281970,"acr": "psd2_sca", "txn": "8b4729cc-32e4-4370-8cf0-5796154d1296", "authorization_details":"acr": "psd2_sca", "txn": "8b4729cc-32e4-4370-8cf0-5796154d1296", "authorization_details": [ {"type": "https://scheme.example.com/payment_initiation", "actions":"type": "https://scheme.example.com/payment_initiation", "actions": ["initiate", "status", "cancel""initiate", "status", "cancel" ],"locations":"locations": ["https://example.com/payments""https://example.com/payments" ],"instructedAmount":"instructedAmount": {"currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50""currency": "EUR", "amount": "123.50" },"creditorName": "Merchant123", "creditorAccount":"creditorName": "Merchant123", "creditorAccount": {"iban": "DE02100100109307118603""iban": "DE02100100109307118603" },"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref"remittanceInformationUnstructured": "Ref NumberMerchant"Merchant" } ],"debtorAccount":"debtorAccount": {"iban": "DE40100100103307118608", "user_role": "owner""iban": "DE40100100103307118608", "user_role": "owner" } } </sourcecode> </figure> </section> </section> <section anchor="metadata"><name>Metadata</name> <t>To advertise its support for this feature, the supported list of authorization details types is included in the AS metadata response <xref target="RFC8414"></xref> using the metadata parameter <tt>authorization_details_types_supported</tt>, which is a JSON array.</t> <t>This is illustrated by the following example:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor server metadataof Server Metadata about thesupported authorization details. </name>Supported Authorization Details</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{type="json">{ ..."authorization_details_types_supported":[ "payment_initiation", "account_information""authorization_details_types_supported":[ "payment_initiation", "account_information" ] } </sourcecode> </figure> <t>ClientsMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> indicate the authorization details types they will use when requesting authorization with the client registration metadata parameter <tt>authorization_details_types</tt>, which is a JSON array.</t> <t>This is illustrated by the following example:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor server metadataof Server Metadata aboutauthorization details. </name>Authorization Details</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">{type="json">{ ..."authorization_details_types":[ "payment_initiation""authorization_details_types":[ "payment_initiation" ] } </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The registration of authorization details types with the AS isout ofoutside the scope of this specification.</t> </section> <section anchor="implementation-considerations"><name>Implementation Considerations</name> <section anchor="using-authorization-details-in-a-certain-deployment"><name>Usingauthorization detailsAuthorization Details in acertain deployment</name>Certain Deployment</name> <t>Using authorization details in a certain deployment will require the following steps:</t> <ulspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <li>Define authorization detailstypes</li>types.</li> <li>Publish authorization details types in the OAuth servermetadata</li>metadata.</li> <li>Determine how authorization details are shown to the user in the user consentprompt</li> <li>(if needed) Enrichprompt.</li> <li>If needed, enrich authorization details in the user consent process(e.g.(e.g., add selected accounts or setexpirations)</li> <li>(if needed) Determineexpirations).</li> <li>If needed, determine how authorization details are reflected in access token content or introspectionresponses</li>responses.</li> <li>Determine how theresource server(s) process(s)RSs process the authorization details or token data derived from authorizationdetails</li> <li>(if needed) Entitledetails.</li> <li>If needed, entitle clients to use certain authorization detailstypes</li>types.</li> </ul> </section> <section anchor="minimal-implementation-support"><name>Minimalimplementation support</name>Implementation Support</name> <t>Generalauthorization serverAS implementations supporting this specification should provide the following basic functions:</t> <ulspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <li>Support advertisement of supported authorization details types in OAuth server metadata</li> <li>Accept the <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter in authorization requests in conformance with this specification</li> <li>Support storage of consented authorization details as part of a grant</li> <li>Implement default behavior for adding authorization details to access tokens and token introspection responses in order to make them available toresource serversRSs (similar to scope values). This should work with any grant type, especially <tt>authorization_code</tt> and <tt>refresh_token</tt>.</li> </ul> <t>Processing and presentation of authorization details will vary significantly among different authorization details types. Implementations should therefore support customization of the respective behavior. In particular, implementationsshould:</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>allowshould allow deploymentsto determineto:</t> <ul spacing="normal"> <li>determine presentation of the authorizationdetails</li> <li>allow deployments to modifydetails;</li> <li>modify requested authorization details in the user consent process,e.g.e.g., addingfields</li> <li>allow deployments to mergefields; and</li> <li>merge requested andpre-existingpreexisting authorizationdetails</li>details.</li> </ul> <t>One approach to supporting such customization would be to have a mechanism allowing the registration of extension modules, each of them responsible for rendering the respective user consent and any transformation needed to provide the data needed to theresource serverRS by way of structured access tokens or token introspection responses.</t> </section> <section anchor="use-of-machine-readable-type-schemas"><name>Use ofMachine-readableMachine-Readable Type Schemas</name> <t>Implementations might allow deployments to use machine-readable schema languages for defining authorization details types to facilitate creating and validating authorization details objects against such schemas. For example, if an authorization details <tt>type</tt> were defined using JSON Schemas <xref target="JSON.Schema"></xref>, the JSON Schema identifier could be used as <tt>type</tt> value in the respective authorization details objects.</t><t>Note however<t>Note, however, that <tt>type</tt> values are identifiers understood by the AS and, to the extent necessary, the client and RS. This specification makes no assumption that a <tt>type</tt> value would point to a machine-readable schemaformat,format or that any party in the system (such as the client, AS, or RS) would dereference or process the contents of the <tt>type</tt> field in any specific way.</t> </section> <section anchor="large_requests"><name>Largerequests</name>Requests</name> <t>Authorization request URIs containing <tt>authorization_details</tt> in a request parameter or a request object can become very long.ImplementersTherefore, implementers shouldthereforeconsider using the <tt>request_uri</tt> parameter as defined in <xref target="RFC9101"></xref> in combination with the pushed request object mechanism as defined in <xref target="RFC9126"></xref> to pass <tt>authorization_details</tt> in a reliable and secure manner. Here is an example of such a pushed authorization request that sends the authorization request data directly to the AS via an HTTPS-protected connection:</t> <figure><name>Examplefor large requestof Large Request including<tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name> <artwork>"authorization_details"</name> <sourcecode type="http-message"><![CDATA[ POST /as/par HTTP/1.1 Host: as.example.com Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Authorization: Basic czZCaGRSa3F0Mzo3RmpmcDBaQnIxS3REUmJuZlZkbUl3response_type=code&response_type=code& client_id=s6BhdRkqt3&state=af0ifjsldkj &redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fclient.example.org%2Fcb &code_challenge_method=S256 &code_challenge=K2-ltc83acc4h0c9w6ESC_rEMTJ3bwc-uCHaoeK1t8U &authorization_details=%5B%7B%22type%22%3A%22account_information%22&state=af0ifjsldkj &redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fclient.example.org%2Fcb &code_challenge_method=S256 &code_challenge=K2-ltc83acc4h0c9w6ESC_rEMTJ3bwc-uCHaoeK1t8U &authorization_details=%5B%7B%22type%22%3A%22account_information%22 %2C%22actions%22%3A%5B%22list_accounts%22%2C%22read_balances%22%2C% 22read_transactions%22%5D%2C%22locations%22%3A%5B%22https%3A%2F%2Fe xample.com%2Faccounts%22%5D%7D%2C%7B%22type%22%3A%22payment_initiat ion%22%2C%22actions%22%3A%5B%22initiate%22%2C%22status%22%2C%22canc el%22%5D%2C%22locations%22%3A%5B%22https%3A%2F%2Fexample.com%2Fpaym ents%22%5D%2C%22instructedAmount%22%3A%7B%22currency%22%3A%22EUR%22 %2C%22amount%22%3A%22123.50%22%7D%2C%22creditorName%22%3A%22Merchan t123%22%2C%22creditorAccount%22%3A%7B%22iban%22%3A%22DE021001001093 07118603%22%7D%2C%22remittanceInformationUnstructured%22%3A%22Ref%2 0Number%20Merchant%22%7D%5D</artwork>]]></sourcecode> </figure> </section> </section> <section anchor="security_considerations"><name>Security Considerations</name> <t>The <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter is sent through the user agent in case of an OAuth authorization request, which makes them vulnerable to modifications by the user. If the integrity of the <tt>authorization_details</tt> is a concern, clientsMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> protect <tt>authorization_details</tt> against tampering and swapping. This can be achieved by signing the request using signed request objects as defined in <xref target="RFC9101"></xref> or using the <tt>request_uri</tt> authorization request parameter as defined in <xref target="RFC9101"></xref> in conjunction with <xref target="RFC9126"></xref> to pass the URI of the request object to theauthorization server.</t>AS.</t> <t>All string comparisons in an <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter are to be done as defined by <xref target="RFC8259"></xref>. No additional transformation or normalization is to be done in evaluating equivalence of string values.</t> <t>The common data field <tt>locations</tt> allows a client to specify where it intends to use a certain authorization, i.e., it is possible to unambiguously assign permissions toresource servers.RSs. In situations with multipleresource servers,RSs, this prevents unintended client authorizations(e.g.(e.g., a <tt>read</tt> scope value potentially applicable for an email as well as a cloud service) through audience restriction.</t> <t>The ASMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> properlysanitizedsanitize and handle the data passed in the <tt>authorization_details</tt> in order to prevent injection attacks.</t> <t>The Security Considerations of <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>, <xref target="RFC7662"></xref>, and <xref target="RFC8414"></xref> also apply.</t> </section> <section anchor="privacy_considerations"><name>Privacy Considerations</name> <t>It is especially important for implementers to design and use authorization details in a privacy-preserving manner.</t> <t>Any sensitive personal data included in <tt>authorization_details</tt> must be prevented from leaking, e.g., through referrer headers. Implementation options include encrypted request objects as defined in <xref target="RFC9101"></xref> or transmission of <tt>authorization_details</tt> via end-to-end encrypted connections between client andauthorization serverAS by utilizing <xref target="RFC9126"></xref> and the <tt>request_uri</tt> authorization request parameter as defined in <xref target="RFC9101"></xref>. The latter does not requireapplication level encryptionapplication-level encryption, but it requires another message exchange between the client and the AS.</t> <t>Even if the request data is encrypted, an attacker could use theauthorization serverAS to learn the user's data by injecting the encrypted request data into an authorization request on a device under their control and use theauthorization server'sAS's user consent screens to show the (decrypted) user data in the clear. Implementations need to consider this attack vector and implement appropriate countermeasures,e.g.e.g., by only showing portions of the data or, if possible, determining whether the assumed user context is still the same (after user authentication).</t> <t>The AS needs to take into consideration the privacy implications when sharing <tt>authorization_details</tt> with the client orresource servers.RSs. The AS should share this data with those parties on a"need"need toknow"know" basis as determined by local policy.</t> </section> <sectionanchor="Acknowledgements"><name>Acknowledgements</name> <t>We would like to thank Daniel Fett, Sebastian Ebling, Dave Tonge, Mike Jones, Nat Sakimura, and Rob Otto for their valuable feedback during the preparation of this specification.</t> <t>We would also like to thank Vladimir Dzhuvinov, Takahiko Kawasaki, Daniel Fett, Dave Tonge, Travis Spencer, Joergen Binningsboe, Aamund Bremer, Steinar Noem, Francis Pouatcha, Jacob Ideskog, Hannes Tschofenig, and Aaron Parecki for their valuable feedback to this specification.</t> </section> <sectionanchor="iana_considerations"><name>IANA Considerations</name> <section anchor="oauth-parameters-registration"><name>OAuth Parameters Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following parameter has been registered in the"OAuth Parameters""OAuth Parameters" registry <xref target="IANA.OAuth.Parameters"></xref> established by <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt>Name:</dt> <dd><tt>authorization_details</tt></dd> <dt>Parameter Usage Location:</dt> <dd>authorization request, token request, token response</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd><dt>Specification Document(s):</dt> <dd>[[ this document ]]</dd><dt>Reference:</dt> <dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="json-web-token-claims-registration"><name>JSON Web Token Claims Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following value has been registered in the IANA"JSON"JSON Web TokenClaims"Claims" registry established by <xref target="RFC7519"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt>Claim Name:</dt> <dd><tt>authorization_details</tt></dd> <dt>Claim Description:</dt> <dd>The claim <tt>authorization_details</tt> contains a JSON array of JSON objects representing the rights of the access token. Each JSON object contains the data to specify the authorization requirements for a certain type of resource.</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd><dt>Specification Document(s):</dt><dt>Reference:</dt> <dd><xref target="jwt_based_access_tokens"></xref> of[[ this document ]]</dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="oauth-token-introspection-response-registration"><name>OAuth Token Introspection Response Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following value has been registered in the IANA"OAuth"OAuth Token IntrospectionResponse"Response" registry established by <xref target="RFC7662"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt>Name:</dt> <dd><tt>authorization_details</tt></dd> <dt>Description:</dt> <dd>The member <tt>authorization_details</tt> contains a JSON array of JSON objects representing the rights of the access token. Each JSON object contains the data to specify the authorization requirements for a certain type of resource.</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd><dt>Specification Document(s):</dt><dt>Reference:</dt> <dd><xref target="token_introspection"></xref> of[[ this document ]]</dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="oauth-authorization-server-metadata-registration"><name>OAuth Authorization Server Metadata Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following values have been registered in the IANA"OAuth"OAuth Authorization ServerMetadata"Metadata" registry of <xref target="IANA.OAuth.Parameters"></xref> established by <xref target="RFC8414"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact">spacing="normal"> <dt>Metadata Name:</dt> <dd><tt>authorization_details_types_supported</tt></dd> <dt>Metadata Description:</dt> <dd>JSON array containing the authorization details types the AS supports</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd><dt>Specification Document(s):</dt><dt>Reference:</dt> <dd><xref target="metadata"></xref> of[[ this document ]]</dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="oauth-dynamic-client-registration-metadata-registration"><name>OAuth Dynamic Client Registration Metadata Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following value has been registered in the IANA"OAuth"OAuth Dynamic Client RegistrationMetadata"Metadata" registry of <xref target="IANA.OAuth.Parameters"></xref> established by <xref target="RFC7591"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact"> <dt>Metadataspacing="normal"> <dt>Client Metadata Name:</dt> <dd><tt>authorization_details_types</tt></dd><dt>Metadata<dt>Client Metadata Description:</dt> <dd>Indicates what authorization details types the client uses.</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd><dt>Specification Document(s):</dt><dt>Reference:</dt> <dd><xref target="metadata"></xref> of[[ this document ]]</dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="oauth-extensions-error-registration"><name>OAuth Extensions Error Registration</name><t>This specification requests registration of the<t>The following value has been registered in the IANA"OAuth"OAuth ExtensionsError" registryError Registry" of <xref target="IANA.OAuth.Parameters"></xref> established by <xref target="RFC6749"></xref>.</t> <dlspacing="compact"> <dt>Error name:</dt>spacing="normal"> <dt>Name:</dt> <dd><tt>invalid_authorization_details</tt></dd><dt>Error usage location:</dt><dt>Usage Location:</dt> <dd>token endpoint, authorization endpoint</dd><dt>Related protocol extension:</dt><dt>Protocol Extension:</dt> <dd>OAuth 2.0 Rich Authorization Requests</dd> <dt>Change Controller:</dt> <dd>IETF</dd> <dt>Reference:</dt> <dd><xref target="authz_details_error"></xref> of[[ this document ]]</dd>RFC 9396</dd> </dl> </section> </section> </middle> <back><references><name>Normative<references> <name>References</name> <references> <name>Normative References</name> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7519.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7662.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8414.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8628.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8707.xml"/> </references><references><name>Informative<references> <name>Informative References</name> <reference anchor="CSC"target="https://cloudsignatureconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/CSC_API_V1_1.0.4.0.pdf">target="https://cloudsignatureconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/CSC_API_V1_1.0.4.0.pdf"> <front> <title>Architectures and protocols for remote signature applications</title><author fullname="Cloud Signature Consortium"> <organization abbrev="CSC">Cloud<author> <organization>Cloud Signature Consortium</organization> </author> <date year="2019"month="Jun" day="01"></date>month="June"></date> </front> <refcontent>Version 1.0.4.0</refcontent> </reference> <reference anchor="ETSI" target="https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/119400_119499/119432/01.01.01_60/ts_119432v010101p.pdf"> <front><title>ETSI TS 119 432, Electronic<title>Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Protocols for remote digital signature creation </title><author fullname="ETSI"> <organization abbrev="ETSI">ETSI</organization><author> <organization>ETSI</organization> </author> <date year="2019"month="Mar" day="20"></date>month="March"/> </front> <seriesInfo name="ETSI TS" value="119 432"/> <refcontent>V1.1.1</refcontent> </reference> <reference anchor="IANA.OAuth.Parameters" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/oauth-parameters"> <front> <title>OAuth Parameters</title> <author> <organization>IANA</organization> </author><date></date></front> </reference> <reference anchor="JSON.Schema" target="https://json-schema.org/"> <front> <title>JSON Schema</title><author fullname="json-schema.org"> <organization abbrev="json-schema.org">json-schema.org</organization><author> <organization>OpenJS Foundation</organization> </author> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="OIDC" target="https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html"> <front> <title>OpenID Connect Core 1.0 incorporating errata set 1</title> <authorfullname="Nat Sakimura"initials="N." surname="Sakimura"> <organization>NRI</organization> </author> <authorfullname="John Bradley"initials="J." surname="Bradley"> <organization>Ping Identity</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Mike Jones"initials="M." surname="Jones"> <organization>Microsoft</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Breno de Medeiros"initials="B." surname="de Medeiros"> <organization>Google</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Chuck Mortimore"initials="C." surname="Mortimore"> <organization>Salesforce</organization> </author> <date year="2014" month="Nov" day="8"></date> </front> </reference> <referenceanchor="OpenID.CIBA"anchor="OID-CIBA" target="https://openid.net/specs/openid-client-initiated-backchannel-authentication-core-1_0.html"> <front> <title>OpenID ConnectClient InitiatedClient-Initiated Backchannel Authentication Flow - Core 1.0</title> <authorfullname="Gonzalo Fernandez Rodriguez"initials="G." surname="Fernandez"><organization abbrev="Telefonica">Telefonica I+D</organization><organization>Telefonica</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Florian Walter"initials="F." surname="Walter"> <organization>Deutsche Telekom AG</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Axel Nennker"initials="A." surname="Nennker"> <organization>Deutsche Telekom AG</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Dave Tonge"initials="D." surname="Tonge"><organization abbrev="Moneyhub">Moneyhub</organization><organization>Moneyhub</organization> </author> <authorfullname="Brian Campbell"initials="B." surname="Campbell"> <organization abbrev="Ping Identity">Ping Identity</organization> </author> <dateyear="2019" month="January" day="16"></date>year="2021" month="September" day="1"></date> </front> </reference> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.0020.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6749.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7591.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8259.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9101.xml"/> <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9126.xml"/> <referenceanchor="transaction-authorization"anchor="Transaction-Auth" target="https://medium.com/oauth-2/transaction-authorization-or-why-we-need-to-re-think-oauth-scopes-2326e2038948"> <front> <title>Transaction Authorization or why we need to re-think OAuth scopes</title> <author fullname="Torsten Lodderstedt" initials="T." surname="Lodderstedt"> <organization>yes.com</organization> </author> <date year="2019"month="Apr"month="April" day="20"></date> </front> </reference> </references> </references> <section anchor="additional-examples"><name>Additional Examples</name> <section anchor="openid"><name>OpenID Connect</name> <t>OpenID Connect <xref target="OIDC"></xref> specifies the JSON-based <tt>claims</tt> request parameter that can be used to specify the claims a client (acting as an OpenID Connect Relying Party) wishes to receive in a fine-grained and privacy-preserving way as well as assign those claims to certain delivery mechanisms,i.e.i.e., ID Token or userinfo response.</t> <t>The combination of the scope value <tt>openid</tt> and the additional parameter <tt>claims</tt> can be used beside <tt>authorization_details</tt> in the same way as every non-OIDC scope value.</t> <t>Alternatively, there could be an authorization details type for OpenID Connect. This section gives an example of what such an authorization details type could look like, but defining this authorization details type is outside the scope of this specification.</t> <t>These hypothetical examples try to encapsulate all details specific to the OpenID Connect part of an authorization process into an authorization JSON object.</t> <t>The top-levelfieldfields are based on the definitions given in <xref target="OIDC"></xref>:</t><ul spacing="compact"> <li><tt>claim_sets</tt>:<dl spacing="normal" newline="false"> <dt><tt>claim_sets</tt>:</dt> <dd>the names of predefined claim sets, replacement for respective scope values, such as<tt>profile</tt></li> <li><tt>max_age</tt>: Maximum<tt>profile</tt></dd> <dt><tt>max_age</tt>:</dt> <dd>Maximum AuthenticationAge</li> <li><tt>acr_values</tt>: requestedAge</dd> <dt><tt>acr_values</tt>:</dt> <dd>requested Authentication Context Class Reference (ACR)values.</li> <li><tt>claims</tt>: thevalues</dd> <dt><tt>claims</tt>:</dt> <dd>the <tt>claims</tt> JSON structure as defined in <xreftarget="OIDC"></xref></li> </ul>target="OIDC"></xref></dd> </dl> <t>This is a simple request for some claim sets.</t> <figure><name>Exampleforof OpenID Connectrequest utilizing <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>Request Utilizing "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecode type="json">[ {"type": "openid", "locations":"type": "openid", "locations": ["https://op.example.com/userinfo""https://op.example.com/userinfo" ],"claim_sets":"claim_sets": ["email", "profile""email", "profile" ] } ] </sourcecode> </figure><t>Note:<aside><t>Note: <tt>locations</tt> specifies the location of the userinfo endpoint since this is the only place where an access token is used by a client(RP)(Relying Party) in OpenID Connect to obtainclaims.</t>claims.</t></aside> <t>A more sophisticated example is shown inthe following</t> <figure><name>Advanced example for<xref target="fig26" format="default"/>.</t> <figure anchor="fig26"><name>Advanced Example of OpenID Connectrequest utilizing <tt>authorization_details</tt>. </name>Request Utilizing "authorization_details"</name> <sourcecode type="json">[ {"type": "openid", "locations":"type": "openid", "locations": ["https://op.example.com/userinfo""https://op.example.com/userinfo" ],"max_age":"max_age": 86400,"acr_values": "urn:mace:incommon:iap:silver", "claims":"acr_values": "urn:mace:incommon:iap:silver", "claims": {"userinfo":"userinfo": {"given_name":"given_name": {"essential":"essential": true },"nickname":"nickname": null,"email":"email": {"essential":"essential": true },"email_verified":"email_verified": {"essential":"essential": true },"picture":"picture": null,"http://example.com/claims/groups":"http://example.com/claims/groups": null },"id_token":"id_token": {"auth_time":"auth_time": {"essential":"essential": true } } } } ] </sourcecode> </figure> </section> <section anchor="signing"><name>Remote Electronic Signing</name> <t>The following example is based on the concept laid out for remote electronic signing in ETSI TS 119 432 <xref target="ETSI"></xref> and theCSCCloud Signature Consortium (CSC) API for remote signature creation <xref target="CSC"></xref>.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor electronic signing. </name>of Electronic Signing</name> <sourcecode type="json">[ {"type": "sign", "locations": [ "https://signing.example.com/signdoc" ], "credentialID": "60916d31-932e-4820-ba82-1fcead1c9ea3", "documentDigests": [ { "hash": "sTOgwOm+474gFj0q0x1iSNspKqbcse4IeiqlDg/HWuI=", "label": "Credit Contract""type": "sign", "locations": [ "https://signing.example.com/signdoc" ], "credentialID": "60916d31-932e-4820-ba82-1fcead1c9ea3", "documentDigests": [ { "hash": "sTOgwOm+474gFj0q0x1iSNspKqbcse4IeiqlDg/HWuI=", "label": "Credit Contract" }, {"hash": "HZQzZmMAIWekfGH0/ZKW1nsdt0xg3H6bZYztgsMTLw0=", "label": "Contract"hash": "HZQzZmMAIWekfGH0/ZKW1nsdt0xg3H6bZYztgsMTLw0=", "label": "Contract Payment ProtectionInsurance"Insurance" } ],"hashAlgorithmOID": "2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1""hashAlgorithmOID": "2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1" } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The top-level fields have the following meaning:</t><ul spacing="compact"> <li><tt>credentialID</tt>: identifier<dl spacing="normal" newline="false"> <dt><tt>credentialID</tt>:</dt> <dd>identifier of the certificate to be used forsigning</li> <li><tt>documentDigests</tt>: arraysigning</dd> <dt><tt>documentDigests</tt>:</dt> <dd>array containing the hash of every document to be signed (<tt>hash</tt> fields). Additionally, the corresponding <tt>label</tt> field identifies the respective document to the user,e.g.e.g., to be used in userconsent.</li> <li><tt>hashAlgorithm</tt>: algorithmconsent.</dd> <dt><tt>hashAlgorithm</tt>:</dt> <dd>algorithm that was used to calculate the hashvalues.</li> </ul>values</dd> </dl> <t>The AS is supposed to ask the user for consent for the creation of signatures for the documents listed in the structure. The client uses the access token issued as a result of the process to call thesign doc endpointdocument signature API at the respective signing service to actually create the signature. This access token is bound to the client, the useridID and the hashes (and signature algorithm) as consented by the user.</t> </section> <section anchor="tax"><name>Access to Tax Data</name> <t>This example is inspired by an API allowing third parties to access citizen's tax declarations and income statements, for example, to determine their creditworthiness.</t> <figure><name>Examplefor tax data access. </name>of Tax Data Access</name> <sourcecode type="json">[ {"type": "tax_data", "locations": [ "https://taxservice.govehub.no.example.com" ], "actions":"read_tax_declaration", "periods": ["2018"], "duration_of_access":"type": "tax_data", "locations": [ "https://taxservice.govehub.no.example.com" ], "actions":"read_tax_declaration", "periods": ["2018"], "duration_of_access": 30,"tax_payer_id": "23674185438934""tax_payer_id": "23674185438934" } ] </sourcecode> </figure> <t>The top-level fields have the following meaning:</t><ul spacing="compact"> <li><tt>periods</tt>: determines the<dl spacing="normal" newline="false"> <dt><tt>periods</tt>:</dt> <dd>the periods the client wants toaccess</li> <li><tt>duration_of_access</tt>: howaccess</dd> <dt><tt>duration_of_access</tt>:</dt> <dd>how longdoestheclientclients intend to access the data indays</li> <li><tt>tax_payer_id</tt>: identifierdays</dd> <dt><tt>tax_payer_id</tt>:</dt> <dd>identifier of the taxpayer (if known to theclient)</li> </ul>client)</dd> </dl> </section> <section anchor="ehealth"><name>eHealth</name> <t>These two examples are inspired by requirements for APIs used in the Norwegian eHealth system.</t> <t>In this use case, the physical therapist sits in front of their computer using a local Electronic Health Records (EHR) system. They want to look at the electronic patient records of a certainpatientpatient, and they also want to fetch thepatientspatient's journal entries in another system, perhaps at another institution or a national service. Access to this data is provided by an API.</t> <t>The information necessary to authorize the request at the API is only known by the EHRsystem,system and must be presented to the API.</t> <t>In the first example, the authorization details object contains the identifier of an organization. In this case, the API needs to know if the given organization has the lawful basis for processing personal health information to give access to sensitive data.</t> <figure><name>eHealthExample. </name>Example</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">"authorization_details":type="json"><![CDATA["authorization_details": {"type": "patient_record", "requesting_entity":"type": "patient_record", "requesting_entity": {"type": "Practitioner", "identifier":"type": "Practitioner", "identifier": [ {"system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.4", "value": "1234567""system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.4", "value": "1234567" }],"practitioner_role":"practitioner_role": {"organization":"organization": {"identifier":"identifier": {"system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.2.101", "type": "ENH", "value": "[organizational number]""system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.2.101", "type": "ENH", "value": "[organizational number]" } } } } }</sourcecode>]]></sourcecode> </figure> <t>In the second example, the API requires more information to authorize the request. In this case, the authorization details object contains additional information about the health institution and the current profession the user has at the time of the request. The additional level of detail could be used for both authorization and data minimization.</t> <figure><name>Advanced eHealthexample. </name>Example</name> <sourcecodetype="JSON">[type="json"><![CDATA[ [ {"type": "patient_record", "location": "https://fhir.example.com/patient", "actions":"type": "patient_record", "location": "https://fhir.example.com/patient", "actions": ["read""read" ],"patient_identifier":"patient_identifier": [ {"system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.1", "value": "12345678901""system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.1", "value": "12345678901" } ],"reason_for_request": "Clinical treatment", "requesting_entity":"reason_for_request": "Clinical treatment", "requesting_entity": {"type": "Practitioner", "identifier":"type": "Practitioner", "identifier": [ {"system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.4", "value": "1234567""system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.4.4", "value": "1234567" } ],"practitioner_role":"practitioner_role": {"organization":"organization": {"identifier":"identifier": [ {"system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.2.101", "type": "ENH", "value": "<organizational number>""system": "urn:oid:2.16.578.1.12.4.1.2.101", "type": "ENH", "value": "<organizational number>" } ],"type":"type": {"coding":"coding": [ {"system": "http://hl7.example.org/fhir/org-type", "code": "dept", "display": "Hospital Department""system": "http://hl7.example.org/fhir/org-type", "code": "dept", "display": "Hospital Department" } ] },"name": "Akuttmottak""name": "Akuttmottak" },"profession":"profession": {"coding":"coding": [ {"system": "http://snomed.example.org/sct", "code": "36682004", "display": "Physical therapist""system": "http://snomed.example.org/sct", "code": "36682004", "display": "Physical therapist" } ] } } } } ]</sourcecode>]]></sourcecode> </figure> <t>Description of the fields:</t><ul spacing="compact"> <li><tt>patient_identifier</tt>: the<dl spacing="normal" newline="false"> <dt><tt>patient_identifier</tt>:</dt> <dd>the identifier of the patient composed of a system identifier in OID format (namespace) and the actual value within thisnamespace.</li> <li><tt>reason_for_request</tt>: thenamespace.</dd> <dt><tt>reason_for_request</tt>:</dt> <dd>the reason why the user wants to access a certainAPI</li> <li><tt>requesting_entity</tt>: specificationAPI.</dd> <dt><tt>requesting_entity</tt>:</dt> <dd>specification of the requester by means of identity, role and organizational context. This data is provided to facilitate authorization and for auditingpurposes.</li> </ul>purposes.</dd> </dl> <t>In this use case, the AS authenticates the requester, who is not the patient, and approves access based on policies.</t> </section> </section> <sectionanchor="document-history"><name>Document History</name> <t>[[ To be removed from the final specification ]]</t> <t>-22</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Add clarifying language around the geolocation example and Section 6.1 per Paul Wouters' ballot comment</li> </ul> <t>-21</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated feedback from Robert Wilton and <u format="char-num">É</u>ric Vyncke</li> </ul> <t>-20</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated feedback from Murray Kucherawy</li> </ul> <t>-19</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated feedback from Lars Eggert</li> </ul> <t>-18</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>IANA Considerations cleanup</li> </ul> <t>-17</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated feedback from Genart review</li> </ul> <t>-16</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated feedback from Sec Dir review</li> </ul> <t>-15</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Editorial updates from Roman Danyliw's AD review</li> <li>Other editorial updates</li> </ul> <t>-14</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Added clarification regarding authorization details types matching</li> <li>Removed duplicate text on use of "scope" and "resource" parameters alongside "authorization_details"</li> <li>Replaced duplicate error response description in Section 8 with reference to Section 5</li> </ul> <t>-13</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Editorial updates from Roman Danyliw's AD review</li> <li>Removed normative language from field definitions.</li> </ul> <t>-12</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Clarify introspection response.</li> <li>Editorial updates</li> </ul> <t>-11</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Updated IANA registrations adding <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameter</li> </ul> <t>-10</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Updated IANA registrations</li> </ul> <t>-09</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Incorporated feedback by Hannes as document shepherd</li> </ul> <t>-08</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>formatting in authorization details type section</li> <li>added example for <tt>privileges</tt> common data element</li> </ul> <t>-07</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>incorporated review feedback from WGLC</li> <li>fixed wording in token introspection section</li> <li>added privacy considerations re authorization details in token response</li> </ul> <t>-06</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>removed use of resource indicators to filter authorization details in token response</li> </ul> <t>-05</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>added <tt>authorization_details</tt> token request parameter and discussion on authorization details comparison</li> <li>added <tt>privileges</tt> field to authorization details (to align with GNAP)</li> <li>added IANA text and changed metadata parameter names</li> <li>added text about use of machine-readable type schemas, e.g. JSON Schema</li> <li>added text on how authorization details are determined for access token issued with token response</li> <li>added token error response and further error conditions to authorization error response</li> </ul> <t>-04</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>restructured draft for better readability</li> <li>simplified normative text about use of the <tt>resource</tt> parameter with <tt>authorization_details</tt></li> <li>added implementation considerations for deployments and products</li> <li>added type union language from GNAP</li> <li>added recommendation to use PARanchor="Acknowledgements" numbered="false"> <name>Acknowledgements</name> <t>We would like tocope with large requeststhank <contact fullname="Daniel Fett"/>, <contact fullname="Sebastian Ebling"/>, <contact fullname="Dave Tonge"/>, <contact fullname="Mike Jones"/>, <contact fullname="Nat Sakimura"/>, and <contact fullname="Rob Otto"/> forrequest protection</li> </ul> <t>-03</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Updated references to current revisions or RFC numbers</li> <li>Added section about enrichment of authorization details objects bytheir valuable feedback during theAS</li> <li>Clarified processing of unknown authorization details parameters</li> <li>clarified dependencies between <tt>resource</tt> and <tt>authorization_details</tt> parameters</li> </ul> <t>-02</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Clarify "type" parameter processing</li> </ul> <t>-01</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Minor fix-up in a few examples</li> </ul> <t>-00 (WG draft)</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>initial WG revision</li> </ul> <t>-03</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Reworked examples to illustrate privacy preserving use of <tt>authorization_details</tt></li> <li>Added text on audience restriction</li> <li>Added description of relationship between <tt>scope</tt> and <tt>authorization_details</tt></li> <li>Added text on token request & response and <tt>authorization_details</tt></li> <li>Added text on how authorization details are conveyed to RSs by JWTs or token introspection endpoint response</li> <li>Added descriptionpreparation ofrelationship between <tt>claims</tt> and <tt>authorization_details</tt></li> <li>Added more example from different sectors</li> <li>Clarified string comparison to be byte-exact without collation</li> </ul> <t>-02</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>Added Security Considerations</li> <li>Added Privacy Considerations</li> <li>Added notes on URI size and authorization details</li> <li>Added requirementthis specification.</t> <t>We would also like toreturn the effective authorization details granted by the resource owner in the token response</li> <li>changed <tt>authorization_details</tt> structure from objectthank <contact fullname="Vladimir Dzhuvinov"/>, <contact fullname="Takahiko Kawasaki"/>, <contact fullname="Daniel Fett"/>, <contact fullname="Dave Tonge"/>, <contact fullname="Travis Spencer"/>, <contact fullname="Joergen Binningsboe"/>, <contact fullname="Aamund Bremer"/>, <contact fullname="Steinar Noem"/>, <contact fullname="Francis Pouatcha"/>, <contact fullname="Jacob Ideskog"/>, <contact fullname="Hannes Tschofenig"/>, and <contact fullname="Aaron Parecki"/> for their valuable feedback toarray</li> <li>added Justin Richer & Brian Campbell as Co-Authors</li> </ul> <t>-00 / -01</t> <ul spacing="compact"> <li>first draft</li> </ul>this specification.</t> </section> </back> </rfc>