openwallet-foundation-labs / sd-jwt-js

A JavaScript implementation of the Selective Disclosure JWT (SD-JWT) spec.
https://sdjwt.js.org/
Apache License 2.0
36 stars 12 forks source link

Verification for jwt and kb+jwt reconstruct base64 encoding #157

Closed c2bo closed 6 months ago

c2bo commented 6 months ago

Verification right now takes a JSON Object and re-encodes this for validation (see https://github.com/openwallet-foundation-labs/sd-jwt-js/blob/d9eaf4465bb5f50f21d90549678d6c426fea0ae8/packages/core/src/kbjwt.ts#L39C1-L41C41):

const header = Base64urlEncode(JSON.stringify(this.header));
const payload = Base64urlEncode(JSON.stringify(this.payload));
const data = `${header}.${payload}`;

This means that the original encoding of header/payload does not get preserved and signature validation might fail. A good example would be the sd-jwt-vc spec example created by the python reference implementation of sd-jwt. When debugging the calls for verification, header and payload change and signature validation fails (because the original encoding is not minified and the new encoding is minified).

Test Vectors to reproduce the problem with:

    const publicKeyExampleJwt: JWK = {
        kty: "EC",
        crv: "P-256",
        x: "b28d4MwZMjw8-00CG4xfnn9SLMVMM19SlqZpVb_uNtQ",
        y: "Xv5zWwuoaTgdS6hV43yI6gBwTnjukmFQQnJ_kCxzqk8",
    };
    let encodedJwt: string | undefined =
        "eyJhbGciOiAiRVMyNTYiLCAidHlwIjogInZjK3NkLWp3dCIsICJraWQiOiAiZG9jLXNpZ25lci0wNS0yNS0yMDIyIn0.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.QXgzrePAdq_WZVGCwDxP-l8h0iyckrHBNidxVqGtKJ0LMzObqgaXUD1cgGEf7d9TexPkBcgQYqjuzlfbeCxxuA~WyJRZ19PNjR6cUF4ZTQxMmExMDhpcm9BIiwgImFkZHJlc3MiLCB7InN0cmVldF9hZGRyZXNzIjogIjEyMyBNYWluIFN0IiwgImxvY2FsaXR5IjogIkFueXRvd24iLCAicmVnaW9uIjogIkFueXN0YXRlIiwgImNvdW50cnkiOiAiVVMifV0~WyI2SWo3dE0tYTVpVlBHYm9TNXRtdlZBIiwgImVtYWlsIiwgImpvaG5kb2VAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iXQ~WyJlbHVWNU9nM2dTTklJOEVZbnN4QV9BIiwgImZhbWlseV9uYW1lIiwgIkRvZSJd~WyIyR0xDNDJzS1F2ZUNmR2ZyeU5STjl3IiwgImdpdmVuX25hbWUiLCAiSm9obiJd~eyJhbGciOiAiRVMyNTYiLCAidHlwIjogImtiK2p3dCJ9.eyJub25jZSI6ICIxMjM0NTY3ODkwIiwgImF1ZCI6ICJodHRwczovL2V4YW1wbGUuY29tL3ZlcmlmaWVyIiwgImlhdCI6IDE3MDk5OTYxODUsICJzZF9oYXNoIjogIjc4cFFEazJOblNEM1dKQm5SN015aWpmeUVqcGJ5a01yRnlpb2ZYSjlsN0kifQ.7k4goAlxM4a3tHnvCBCe70j_I-BCwtzhBRXQNk9cWJnQWxxt2kIqCyzcwzzUc0gTwtbGWVQoeWCiL5K6y3a4VQ";
lukasjhan commented 6 months ago

Thank you very much :) That's why we failed to verify jwt created other implementation. We should store the encoded value when jwt is created from encoded, just like Disclosure

c2bo commented 6 months ago

My proposal would be to keep a copy of the original (base64url) JWT as a private variable when creating with fromEncode and use that for the verify call if it exists

lukasjhan commented 6 months ago

My proposal would be to keep a copy of the original (base64url) JWT as a private variable when creating with fromEncode and use that for the verify call if it exists

we posted at the same time :) I'll fix it right away!

lukasjhan commented 6 months ago

@c2bo I finished the implementation. I got one question. Does the key binding JWT also signed with same public key?

c2bo commented 6 months ago

@c2bo I finished the implementation. I got one question. Does the key binding JWT also signed with same public key?

KB+JWT should be signed with the key that can be found in the cnf claim:

"cnf": {
    "jwk": {
      "kty": "EC",
      "crv": "P-256",
      "x": "TCAER19Zvu3OHF4j4W4vfSVoHIP1ILilDls7vCeGemc",
      "y": "ZxjiWWbZMQGHVWKVQ4hbSIirsVfuecCE6t4jT9F2HZQ"
    }
}