SAML metadata WantAssertionsSigned might cause Identity Providers to not sign response

[svschouw-bb]

Current Behavior

The OpenSamlMetadataResolver currently hardcodes the WantAssertionsSigned flag to true. There is some (speculative) evidence¹ this causes some Identity Providers to sign the assertions instead of the response. However, as discussed in #9044 Spring Security will only decrypt assertions if the response is signed.

Expected Behavior

There are 3 (technically 4) signing modes:

1. Signing only the response
2. Signing all the assertions
3. Signing both the response and the assertions
4. Signing nothing
   • I don't think the SAML specification actually allows this

The SAML specification does not seem clear to me as to what WantAssertionsSigned is used for. And there seems to be no flag to want the response signed. But it does seem to require that either the response or the assertions need to be signed, and signing both seems redundant.

So either:

1. Do not set WantAssertionsSigned. The SAML specification should be enough to have either signed.
2. Make the WantAssertionsSigned flag configurable.

Neither of these options will force the Identity Providers to sign the response. So users might still have to manually configure them to sign it.

Context

What are you trying to accomplish? Making it slightly more easy to configure (some) Identity Providers by having correct defaults.
What other alternatives have you considered? SInce all methods in OpenSamlMetadataResolver are private, and the XML string is produced before there is any hook to update the SPSSODescriptor before it is serialized means the only way to change things is to completely copy the OpenSamlMetadataResolver.

In fact, allowing some overrides on the SPSSODescriptor might also allow some other customizations like adding more AssertionConsumerServices

Are you aware of any workarounds? Most Identity Providers can be manually configured to sign the response.

Footnotes

1. "Evidence": https://stackoverflow.com/questions/60159390/sp-metadata-wantassertionssigned-false-or-true#comment106438963_60159390 ↩

[jzheaux]

Thanks, @svschouw-bb. I think it's best to leave it unset since there is nothing in RelyingPartyRegistration to indicate a preference, especially in light of the ambiguities you researched.

I believe #10839 can take care of making it configurable.

[jzheaux]

Closed via 3d87854