首页 | 水果短剧 | 博客 | 论坛 | 交友 | 黄页 | 聊天室 | 游戏 | 寄快递 | 登入邮箱 用户中心 | 云浏览器 | ClaudeBot [Bot] | 退出 | 简体 | English
首页 > 时政 > Trending News

Google Adopts DPoP to Strengthen OAuth 2.0 Against Token Theft and Replay Attacks

🤖 AI 辅助采编👤 编辑部筛查📄 原文来源见正文
PHP 安全服务 · 免费扫描网站 PHP 漏洞 → 一键修复 → 修复验证报告(PHP Patch Assurance) 免费扫描 →
🔊
每篇文章,都有双人深度解读 Every Article Gets a Two-Host Deep Dive
听到焦点,听出门道,发现新闻价值! Discover the Real Value Behind the News
试听 →
简体版 繁体版 分页: 1 / 1
华人空间新闻 官方账号 ✍️ 周四 10月 29, 2026 8:57 pm #1
Summary
InfoQ Homepage News Google Adopts DPoP to Strengthen OAuth 2.0 Against Token Theft and Replay Attacks Oct 29, 2026 2 min read Follow us on Google's OA…
What this means for you
For readers in the US who use Google OAuth-based apps and services, Google's support for DPoP is limited to refresh tokens; access tokens remain standard Bearer tokens. The article says DPoP binds tokens to an asymmetric key pair generated by the client, so a stolen token cannot be replayed without the corresponding private key that remains under the client's control. It also notes that adopting DPoP adds client-side requirements such as generating cryptographic keys, handling timestamps and nonces, and generating HTTP headers and DPoP proof JWTs. DPoP does not protect standard web application session cookies, which remain vulnerable to Infostealer malware, and Google and WICG are developing DBSC to address cookie theft.
Google Adopts DPoP to Strengthen OAuth 2.0 Against Token Theft and Replay Attacks

InfoQ Homepage

News

Google Adopts DPoP to Strengthen OAuth 2.0 Against Token Theft and Replay Attacks

Oct 29, 2026

2
min read

Follow us on

Google's OAuth Platform has recently introduces support for Demonstrating Proof-of-Possession (DPoP), an OAuth 2.0 security mechanism designed to mitigate token theft and replay attacks.

Traditional OAuth bearer tokens operate on a "finders-keepers" model, making them vulnerable to Infostealer malware (e.g. RedLine, NodeStealer) and Adversary-in-the-Middle (AiTM) attacks.

To prevent this types of attacks, DPoP uses cryptography to bind tokens to an asymmetric key pair generated by the client. Consequently, a stolen token cannot be replayed without the corresponding private key, which remains under the client’s control.

Google OAuth platform supports DPoP only for refresh tokens, while access tokens, which are shorter-lived, remain standard Bearer tokens. This decision is motivated by the fact that long-lived refresh tokens are "the primary vector for persistent online impersonation", whereas applying DPoP to access tokens would introduce "asymmetric cryptographic verification overhead" for each request.

It is worth noting that adopting DPoP adds several client-side requirements, including generating cryptographic keys, handling timestamps and nonces correctly, generating the appropriate HTTP headers and the required DPoP proof JWTs.

While DPoP provides protection for API tokens, it does not protect standard web application session cookies, which remain vulnerable to Infostealer malware. To address the threat of cookie theft, Google and the Web Incubator Community Group (WICG) are developing Device Bound Session Credentials (DBSC).

DBSC operates at the browser and network layer to cryptographically bind browser session cookies to the device's hardware (such as TPM). Together, DPoP and DBSC form a comprehensive defense-in-depth strategy against credential theft across both API and web-based user sessions.

Google also notes that DPoP is not appropriate for multi-agent workflows, as one agent cannot easily delegate a task to another agent. This would in fact require the second agent to sign requests on behalf of the first. However, this in not possible without accessing the private key generated by the first agent, which would violate DPoP. As an alternative, Google recommends developers to consider Google Cloud Secure Token Service (STS).

By routing delegation through STS, the intermediate agent can exchange the upstream token for a new, short-lived federated token cryptographically bound to its own local key pair, preserving the sender-constrained security model across the entire agent chain without key exposure.

Since the DPoP private key is stored client-side, its security ultimately depends on the security of the client itself. However, as Dhruv Agnihotri argues, single-page-apps (SPAs) running inside a browser are not entirely protected against misuse of the key. The IETF's guidance for browser-based applications therefore recommends adopting the Backend-for-Frontend pattern to keep tokens and cryptographic keys out of the browser. Agnihotri also proposes a zero-persistence approach, which may be useful when server-side infrastructure is unavailable.

About the Author

Sergio De Simone

The InfoQ Newsletter

A round-up of last week’s content on InfoQ sent out every Tuesday. Join a community of over 250,000 senior developers.

View an example

Source: InfoQ
Join the discussion
Have you ever had an online account show suspicious sign-in activity, and did you sign out all sessions or change your password afterward?
扫码分享
扫码分享本文
打赏给华人空间
打赏
有粉丝喜欢你的作品,你就能收到打赏!
创作者平台 点击了解,加入,创作,圈粉,有赏!
简体版 繁体版 分页: 1 / 1
eBay拍卖狙击神器 — 最后一秒自动出价,永远不超价获胜
华人空间用户专享:前100名6个月免费 · 30天免费试用,随时取消
免费试用 →