JSON Web Token (JWT)

Jones, Michael; Bradley, John; Sakimura, Nat

doi:10.17487/rfc7519

Cited by 300 publications

(168 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

161

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A SET recipient is the same entity referred as a "recipient" in [RFC7519] or "receiver" in related specifications.…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A subject might, for instance, be a principal (e.g., Section 4.1.2 of [RFC7519]), a web resource, an entity such as an IP address, or the issuer of the SET.…”

Section: Subjectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A SET is a JWT [RFC7519] data structure that represents one or more related aspects of a security event that occurred to a subject. The JWT Claims Set in a SET has the following structure:…”

Section: The Security Event Token (Set)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of these claims are present in every SET; others will be specific to particular SET profiles or profile families. Claims in the envelope SHOULD be registered in the "JSON Web Token Claims" registry [IANA.JWT.Claims] or be Public Claims or Private Claims, as defined in [RFC7519].…”

Section: The Security Event Token (Set)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The specification builds on the JSON Web Token (JWT) format [RFC7519] in order to provide a self-contained token that can be optionally signed using JSON Web Signature (JWS) [RFC7515] and/or encrypted using JSON Web Encryption (JWE) [RFC7516].…”

Section: Introduction and Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Security Event Token (SET)

Ansari¹,

Jones²,

Denniss³

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A SET recipient is the same entity referred as a "recipient" in [RFC7519] or "receiver" in related specifications.…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A subject might, for instance, be a principal (e.g., Section 4.1.2 of [RFC7519]), a web resource, an entity such as an IP address, or the issuer of the SET.…”

Section: Subjectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Security Event Token (Set)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Security Event Token (Set)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction and Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Security Event Token (SET)

Ansari¹,

Jones²,

Denniss³

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On dynamic access control in Web 2.0 and beyond: Trends and technologies

Faynberg¹,

Lu²,

Ristock³

2011

Bell Labs Tech. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Performance comparison of programming languages for Internet of Things middleware

Abbade

Cruz

Rodrigues

et al. 2020

Trans Emerging Tel Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid spread of Internet of Things (IoT) devices in recent years has driven the creation of a number of IoT middleware for enabling communication between devices using different standards and technologies. Such middleware facilitates the development of IoT solutions, allowing the developer to handle data and devices through middleware without the need to understand and communicate with each device individually. Although some studies present the performance of middleware solutions, they do not consider the effect of the underlying programming language in the overall performance of the solution. This paper replicates a common middleware use case in three different programming languages, evaluates their comparative performance, and discusses the results found. In the studied use case, Javascript presents better performance for small to medium applications, while, globally, Java demonstrates to be the most robust choice for IoT middleware.

show abstract

JSON Web Token (JWT)

Cited by 300 publications

References 17 publications

Security Event Token (SET)

Security Event Token (SET)

On dynamic access control in Web 2.0 and beyond: Trends and technologies

Performance comparison of programming languages for Internet of Things middleware

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About