A Comprehensive Formal Security Analysis of OAuth 2.0
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The OAuth 2.0 protocol is one of the most widely deployed authorization/single sign-on (SSO) protocols and also serves as the foundation for the new SSO standard OpenID Connect. Despite the popularity of OAuth, so far analysis efforts were mostly targeted at finding bugs in specific implementations and were based on formal models which abstract from many web features or did not provide a formal treatment at all. In this paper, we carry out the first extensive formal analysis of the OAuth 2.0 standard in an expressive web model. Our analysis aims at establishing strong authorization, authentication, and session integrity guarantees, for which we provide formal definitions. In our formal analysis, all four OAuth grant types (authorization code grant, implicit grant, resource owner password credentials grant, and the client credentials grant) are covered. They may even run simultaneously in the same and different relying parties and identity providers, where malicious relying parties, identity providers, and browsers are considered as well. Our modeling and analysis of the OAuth 2.0 standard assumes that security recommendations and best practices are followed, in order to avoid obvious and known attacks. When proving the security of OAuth in our model, we discovered four attacks which break the security of OAuth. The vulnerabilities can be exploited in practice and are present also in OpenID Connect. We propose fixes for the identified vulnerabilities, and then, for the first time, actually prove the security of OAuth in an expressive web model. In particular, we show that the fixed version of OAuth (with security recommendations and best practices in place) provides the authorization, authentication, and session integrity properties we specify.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 6 Jan 2016.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2025A Novel Zero-Trust Identity Framework for Agentic AI: Decentralized Authentication and Fine-Grained Access Controlcited by 28
- 2025ETDI: Mitigating Tool Squatting and Rug Pull Attacks in Model Context Protocol (MCP) by using OAuth-Enhanced Tool Definitions and Policy-Based Access Controlcited by 20
- 2026Zero-Trust Runtime Verification for Agentic Payment Protocols: Mitigating Replay and Context-Binding Failures in AP2cited by 6
- 2026API Secrets Should Never Become Tokens in the LLM's Vocabulary: A Threat Analysis of API Credential Handling in LLM Agent Systems and an Empirical Evaluation of a Vault-Mediated Execution Boundarycited by 0
- 2026API Secrets Should Never Become Tokens in the LLM's Vocabulary: A Threat Analysis of API Credential Handling in LLM Agent Systems and an Empirical Evaluation of a Vault-Mediated Execution Boundary27 Sep 2026
- 2026Zero-Trust Runtime Verification for Agentic Payment Protocols: Mitigating Replay and Context-Binding Failures in AP26 Feb 2026
- 2025ETDI: Mitigating Tool Squatting and Rug Pull Attacks in Model Context Protocol (MCP) by using OAuth-Enhanced Tool Definitions and Policy-Based Access Control2 Jun 2025
- 2025A Novel Zero-Trust Identity Framework for Agentic AI: Decentralized Authentication and Fine-Grained Access Control25 May 2025