view mod_http_oauth2/html/login.html @ 5682:527c747711f3

mod_http_oauth2: Limit revocation to clients own tokens in strict mode RFC 7009 section 2.1 states: > The authorization server first validates the client credentials (in > case of a confidential client) and then verifies whether the token was > issued to the client making the revocation request. If this > validation fails, the request is refused and the client is informed of > the error by the authorization server as described below. The first part was already covered (in strict mode). This adds the later part using the hash of client_id recorded in 0860497152af It still seems weird to me that revoking a leaked token should not be allowed whoever might have discovered it, as that seems the responsible thing to do.
author Kim Alvefur <zash@zash.se>
date Sun, 29 Oct 2023 11:30:49 +0100
parents 401356232e1b
children
line wrap: on
line source

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1" />
<title>{site_name} - Sign in</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="style.css" />
</head>
<body>
{state.error&
	<dialog open="" class="error">
		<p>{state.error}</p>
		<form method="dialog"><button>dismiss</button></form>
	</dialog>}
	<header>
	<h1>{site_name}</h1>
	</header>
	<main>
	<fieldset>
	<legend>Sign in</legend>
	<p>Sign in to your account to continue.</p>
	<form method="post">
		<input type="text" name="username" placeholder="Username" aria-label="Username"
			autocomplete="username" required="" {extra.username_hint~autofocus=""} {extra.username_hint&value="{extra.username_hint?}"} /><br/>
		<input type="password" name="password" placeholder="Password" aria-label="Password"
			autocomplete="current-password" required="" {extra.username_hint&autofocus=""} /><br />
		<input type="submit" value="Sign in" />
	</form>
	</fieldset>
	</main>
</body>
</html>