-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
Add redirect_uri to (Deferred) Credential (Error) Response to continue interaction with end user #723
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
mickrau
wants to merge
10
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
61-redirect-uri-for-openid4vci
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and old review comments may become outdated.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
Add redirect_uri to (Deferred) Credential (Error) Response to continue interaction with end user #723
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
83338b3
add text from issue
mickrau 4518944
improve the wording
mickrau 3db52f7
remove name duplicate in Acknowledgments
mickrau 45de848
Update 1.1/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_1.md
mickrau c5b010a
Update 1.1/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_1.md
mickrau 7571384
remove left-over sentence
mickrau 9a14ea7
Apply suggestions from code review
mickrau 647899c
Apply suggestions from code review
mickrau 4d4952f
redirect_uri using https scheme
mickrau bb227fd
add history entry for redirect_uri
mickrau 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
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.
In my opinion this doesn't make any sense and shows the problem with the current proposal.
There should be sufficient semantic information included with the redirect_uri for the Wallet to understand the purpose. Without this, it is impossible to reasonably render this to the user. Overloading a single 'redirect_uri' parameter provides none of that context and will lead to broken user experiences (or it being simply ignored).
To give some examples:
Error case:
Deferred:
This is the most well defined, but being explicit that this is about the status of the deferred credential request. But knowing what this means when the user has existing successfully provisioned credentials is necessary.
Success:
Is this a one-off warm welcome? Does it get shown once to the user then never again? What about subsequent responses? In general, this would better belong in well-defined field in per-instance credential metadata rather than in the credential response.
Regarding the problem of credential datasets and whether this is the same or different: if we provided more semantic structure we could include an indicator in the response as to whether this is a 'top-level' usable redirect (applying to the access token and applicable to all credentials) or if it is specific to this instance. Making the user go through multiple issuance processes to allow for granular issuer redirects seems pretty broken.
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.
Just to clarify, do you see problems only when there are multiple credentials issued in one process or also when it's just a single credential being issued? My thinking is that this is only a problem for issuing multiple credentials at once, and I agree that the semantics of that are weird here.
Though I think the current text in this PR is still an improvement, and I think issuers could intelligently provide a single
redirect_urifor the entire process, even though it is strange that it would need to repeat it in each credential response.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.
It's less problematic in a single, one-shot credential use case though it is still unclear what exactly it should mean in the case of success. What context should I, as a wallet, provide to the user as to why they should navigate to this URL?
In general I think most these use cases are probably better covered putting these urls into credential display data, that way they can have the actual semantic information for a wallet to know how to use them (especially now we have per-credential display data).
If we do have transient urls, they should be tightly coupled to their meaning in the response (e.g. a url specifically for more information on an error), again so that Wallets can actually properly know how to use them.
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.
Thanks. I agree that it would be useful to have some context for the wallet. But I'm not sure we will be able to enumerate all of the options, which would IMO be necessary for interoperability. Obviously there's "success" and "error", but anything beyond that seems less likely to be taxonomizable.