Which one to use: `authorization-identity` or `authorization-identifier`
Hello, I am confused about those two elements: `authorization-identity` and `authorization-identifier`. Are they equivalent? They seem to be used in the same context. Grepping the XEPS repo shows both are used: $ grep -rl authorization-identity ./xep-0484.xml ./inbox/xep-fast.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0386.xml $ grep -rl authorization-identifier ./xep-0480.xml ./inbox/xep-downgrade-prevention.xml ./inbox/xep-scram-upgrade.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0198.xml ./xep-0388.xml ./xep-0474.xml What confuses me is that they both are used in the same context, f. ex.: "XEP-0386: Bind 2" has `authorization-identity` in successful Bind response: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0386.html#example-4 <success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <authorization-identity>user@example.com/AwesomeXMPP.4232f4d4 </authorization-identity> <bound xmlns='urn:xmpp:bind:0'> <metadata xmlns='urn:xmpp:mam:2'> <start id='YWxwaGEg' timestamp='2008-08-22T21:09:04Z' /> <end id='b21lZ2Eg' timestamp='2020-04-20T14:34:21Z' /> </metadata> </bound> </success> But "XEP-0388: Extensible SASL Profile" uses `authorization-identifier` https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html#example-7 <success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <!-- Base64 of: 'v=msVHs/BzIOHDqXeVH7EmmDu9id8=' --> <additional-data> dj1tc1ZIcy9CeklPSERxWGVWSDdFbW1EdTlpZDg9 </additional-data> <authorization-identifier>user@example.org</authorization-identifier> </success> Is it valid to use `authorization-identifier` in all those cases? What about other XEPS that use `authorization-identity` f. ex. "XEP-0484: Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens" ? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0484.html#example-3 It seems that clients need to expect both variants anyway. I am hoping for some advice or clarification, maybe I have missed something. Thanks, Andrzej -- *Come see us at: *Alchemy Conf 2-3 Apr | ElixirConf EU 15-16 May | Code BEAM Lite Stockholm 2 Jun | Lambda Days 12-13 Jun | *Learn more >> <https://www.erlang-solutions.com/events/>* Erlang Solutions cares about your data and privacy; please find all details about the basis for communicating with you and the way we process your data in our Privacy Policy. <https://www.erlang-solutions.com/privacy-policy.html> You can update your email preferences or unsubscribe from all lists here. <https://forms.erlangsolutions.com/email-preference?epc_hash=pZxDpeyjOBLTF6PHvHhRqcHgo7EMrP5UyVBVmFrgF3g>
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 15:53, Andrzej Telezynski <andrzej.telezynski@erlang-solutions.com> wrote:
Hello,
I am confused about those two elements: `authorization-identity` and `authorization-identifier`. Are they equivalent? They seem to be used in the same context.
Ha, lots of fun. I think the correct one is <authorization-identifier/>. It's in XEP-0388 which is the official definition of the urn:xmpp:sasl:2 namespace. I confirmed it's also what Prosody is using, and lots of client implementations were developed against Prosody. The SASL RFC ( https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4422 ) uses the term "authorization identity" (the term "authorization identifier" does not appear), so I guess that's how the "wrong" term slipped in by mistake, and probably got copied into the later XEPs.
Grepping the XEPS repo shows both are used:
$ grep -rl authorization-identity ./xep-0484.xml ./inbox/xep-fast.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0386.xml
$ grep -rl authorization-identifier ./xep-0480.xml ./inbox/xep-downgrade-prevention.xml ./inbox/xep-scram-upgrade.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0198.xml ./xep-0388.xml ./xep-0474.xml
What confuses me is that they both are used in the same context, f. ex.:
"XEP-0386: Bind 2" has `authorization-identity` in successful Bind response: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0386.html#example-4
<success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <authorization-identity>user@example.com/AwesomeXMPP.4232f4d4</authorization-identity> <bound xmlns='urn:xmpp:bind:0'> <metadata xmlns='urn:xmpp:mam:2'> <start id='YWxwaGEg' timestamp='2008-08-22T21:09:04Z' /> <end id='b21lZ2Eg' timestamp='2020-04-20T14:34:21Z' /> </metadata> </bound> </success>
But "XEP-0388: Extensible SASL Profile" uses `authorization-identifier` https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html#example-7
<success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <!-- Base64 of: 'v=msVHs/BzIOHDqXeVH7EmmDu9id8=' --> <additional-data> dj1tc1ZIcy9CeklPSERxWGVWSDdFbW1EdTlpZDg9 </additional-data> <authorization-identifier>user@example.org</authorization-identifier> </success>
Is it valid to use `authorization-identifier` in all those cases?
What about other XEPS that use `authorization-identity` f. ex. "XEP-0484: Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens" ? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0484.html#example-3
It seems that clients need to expect both variants anyway.
It's a mistake in the XEPs, they shouldn't be contradicting each other. XEP-0388 defines the urn:xmpp:sasl:2 namespace and it defines only <authorization-identifier/>. The only XEPs containing 'authorization-identity' are XEP-0386 and XEP-0484, and I worked on both of those, so apologies! I'll make sure they get fixed. Maybe if we ever bump the sasl:2 namespace we can change the element name to match the SASL RFC's original terminology though :) Regards, Matthew
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:12 PM Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
I think the correct one is <authorization-identifier/>. It's in XEP-0388 which is the official definition of the urn:xmpp:sasl:2 namespace. I confirmed it's also what Prosody is using, and lots of client implementations were developed against Prosody.
Thanks for clarification! So <authorization-identifier/> it is. Regards, Andrzej -- *Come see us at: *Alchemy Conf 2-3 Apr | ElixirConf EU 15-16 May | Code BEAM Lite Stockholm 2 Jun | Lambda Days 12-13 Jun | *Learn more >> <https://www.erlang-solutions.com/events/>* Erlang Solutions cares about your data and privacy; please find all details about the basis for communicating with you and the way we process your data in our Privacy Policy. <https://www.erlang-solutions.com/privacy-policy.html> You can update your email preferences or unsubscribe from all lists here. <https://forms.erlangsolutions.com/email-preference?epc_hash=pZxDpeyjOBLTF6PHvHhRqcHgo7EMrP5UyVBVmFrgF3g>
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 17:12, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 15:53, Andrzej Telezynski <andrzej.telezynski@erlang-solutions.com> wrote:
Hello,
I am confused about those two elements: `authorization-identity` and
`authorization-identifier`.
Are they equivalent? They seem to be used in the same context.
Ha, lots of fun. I think the correct one is <authorization-identifier/>. It's in XEP-0388 which is the official definition of the urn:xmpp:sasl:2 namespace. I confirmed it's also what Prosody is using, and lots of client implementations were developed against Prosody.
The SASL RFC (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4422 ) uses the term "authorization identity" (the term "authorization identifier" does not appear), so I guess that's how the "wrong" term slipped in by mistake, and probably got copied into the later XEPs.
Whoops. Sorry.
Grepping the XEPS repo shows both are used:
$ grep -rl authorization-identity ./xep-0484.xml ./inbox/xep-fast.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0386.xml
$ grep -rl authorization-identifier ./xep-0480.xml ./inbox/xep-downgrade-prevention.xml ./inbox/xep-scram-upgrade.xml ./inbox/sasl2.xml ./xep-0198.xml ./xep-0388.xml ./xep-0474.xml
What confuses me is that they both are used in the same context, f. ex.:
"XEP-0386: Bind 2" has `authorization-identity` in successful Bind response: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0386.html#example-4
<success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <authorization-identity>user@example.com/AwesomeXMPP.4232f4d4 </authorization-identity> <bound xmlns='urn:xmpp:bind:0'> <metadata xmlns='urn:xmpp:mam:2'> <start id='YWxwaGEg' timestamp='2008-08-22T21:09:04Z' /> <end id='b21lZ2Eg' timestamp='2020-04-20T14:34:21Z' /> </metadata> </bound> </success>
But "XEP-0388: Extensible SASL Profile" uses `authorization-identifier` https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html#example-7
<success xmlns='urn:xmpp:sasl:2'> <!-- Base64 of: 'v=msVHs/BzIOHDqXeVH7EmmDu9id8=' --> <additional-data> dj1tc1ZIcy9CeklPSERxWGVWSDdFbW1EdTlpZDg9 </additional-data> <authorization-identifier>user@example.org</authorization-identifier> </success>
Is it valid to use `authorization-identifier` in all those cases?
What about other XEPS that use `authorization-identity` f. ex. "XEP-0484: Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens" ? https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0484.html#example-3
It seems that clients need to expect both variants anyway.
It's a mistake in the XEPs, they shouldn't be contradicting each other. XEP-0388 defines the urn:xmpp:sasl:2 namespace and it defines only <authorization-identifier/>.
The only XEPs containing 'authorization-identity' are XEP-0386 and XEP-0484, and I worked on both of those, so apologies! I'll make sure they get fixed.
Maybe if we ever bump the sasl:2 namespace we can change the element name to match the SASL RFC's original terminology though :)
Yeah, it's not ideal, but I think we're stuck with it. Strictly speaking, I think I'm sort of right in as much as an identifier is a name, whereas the identity is something more abstract. RFC 4422 does use the term "authorization identity string", which is what "authorization-identifier" is. <authorization-identity-string/> is really getting a little too verbose - be glad it wasn't <authz-id-string/>, which would match the ABNF.
Regards, Matthew _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave@xmpp.org
participants (3)
-
Andrzej Telezynski -
Dave Cridland -
Matthew Wild