It is the same intent: you can't use the id_token after it is expired. The main difference is that an id_token is a data structure and you won't need to call any servers or endpoints, as the information is encoded in the token itself. A regular access_token is usually an opaque artifact (like a GUID).

The consumer of the id_token must always verify the (time) validity of it.

I'm not 100% familiar with IS, but I would guess it is a convenience field. You should always check the exp claim.

Expiration is just one of the validations. id_tokens are also digitally signed and that is also a validation you must perform.

I'm answering my own question as have discovered that some of the assumptions behind my question were wrong, so easier to clarify here, rather than re-write the question.

An ID token is meant for proving to a Client that the user has authenticated, and who they are as a result.

When a Client receives an ID token, it will generally do something like convert it to a ClaimsIdentity, and persist this, eg using a cookie.

The ID token has to be un-expired at this point of use (which it should be, since it has just been issued). But after this it is not used again, so it does not matter if it expires while the user still has an active session. The Client has the authentication information it needs, and in turn can choose its own policy for how long the session lasts before the user has to log in again.

My wrong assumption when asking the question was that an ID token and access token should be used together, and therefore both needed to have valid expiry dates. This is wrong for various reasons:

• ID tokens are only for authenticating to a Client (as described above).
• Access tokens have nothing to do with Clients. They are for access to resources and a Client only handles them if it in turn needs to call an resource.
• Something like a standalone MVC or WebForms application only needs an ID token. If it isn't calling an external resource, there is nothing to grant access to, so no access token.

I wanted to post this answer as a comment but since I haven't been very active on StackOverflow, I guess I'm posting it as an alternate answer.

You also use id_token as the id_token_hint when attempting to log the user out of a session http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-session-1_0.html. I honestly don't think that it really matters if the id_token is expired at this point since you're only concerned about logging out a particular user.

I had to dig into this for my own reasons and wrote it up, so I'll post what I learned here...

First, I'll answer the question at the risk of stating the obvious: The ID token cannot be trusted and its content must be ignored if the current time is greater than the expired time. The questioner's answer states that the after the initial authentication of the user, the ID Token isn't used again. However, since the ID Token is signed by the identity provider, it certainly could be useful at any time to give a way of reliably determining who the user is to other services that an app might be using. Using a simple user ID or email address isn't reliable because it can be easily spoofed (anyone can send an email address or user ID), but since an OIDC ID Token is signed by the Authorization server (which also usually has the benefit of being a third party) it cannot be spoofed and is a much more reliable authentication mechanism.

For example, a mobile app may want to be able to tell a backend service who the user is that is using the app and it may need to do so after the brief period following the initial authentication, at which time the ID Token is expired, and thus, cannot be used to reliably authenticate the user.

Therefore, just like the access token (used for authorization - specifying what permissions the user has) can be refreshed, can you refresh the ID Token (used for authentication - specifying who the user is)? According to the OIDC specification, the answer isn't obvious. In OIDC/OAuth there are three "flows" for getting tokens, The Authorization Code flow, the Implicit flow, and the Hybrid flow (which I'll skip below because it's a variant of the other two).

For the implicit flow in OIDC/OAuth you request the ID Token at the authorization endpoint by redirecting the user in the browser to the Authorization endpoint and including id_token as the value of the response_type request parameter. An Implicit Flow Successful Authentication Response is REQUIRED to include the id_token.

For the Authentication Code flow, the client specifies code as the value of the response_type request parameter when redirecting the user to the authorization endpoint. A successful response includes an authorization code. The client client makes a request to the token endpoint with the authorization code and, according to OIDC Core Section 3.1.3.3 Successful Token Response the response MUST include an ID Token.

So for either flow, that's how you initially get the ID Token, but how do you refresh it? OIDC Section 12: Using Refresh Tokens has the following statement about the Refresh Token Response:

Upon successful validation of the Refresh Token, the response body is the Token Response of Section 3.1.3.3 except that it might not contain an id_token.

It might not contain an ID Token and since there is no way specified to force it to include the ID token, you must assume that the response will not contain the ID Token. So technically there is no specified way to "refresh" an ID Token using a refresh token. Therefore, the only way to get a new ID Token is to re-authorize/authenticate the user by redirecting the user to the authorization endpoint and starting the implicit flow or authentication code flow as described above. The OIDC specification does add a prompt request parameter to the authorization request so the client can request that the authorization server not prompt the user with any UI, but the the redirect still has to happen.

Refreshing a token means that you can use it again for requesting something from the authorization server (in this case the OP - the OpenID-Connect Provider) EVEN WHEN THE USER IS NOT LOGGED IN. You typically allow this for limited resources only, and only after the user has logged in and been authenticated at least once. The refresh tokens themselves should be also limited in time.

In OIDC implicit flow you call the Authorization endpoint,
and receive the ID token in the response along with all the scopes and in them all the claims info.
Subsequent calls to an API are meant to be done with code flow.
Implicit flow is meant to enable a javascript only or browser only app. Not an app that is interacting with a server.
So even if there was a way to "refresh" this token, you should not - security wise - allow it to live too long. It will be stolen and reused by unauthorized users impersonating the id. You should force a new login for that.

In code flow you call the OP's Authorization endpoint, and receive an Authorization code (also called an authorization token, or authcode for short). This should expire similar to the id_token that you received in implicit flow, for the same reasons and cannot and should not be renewed.

Your UI or app then call the OP's Token endpoint, and receives (sometimes after the user's further consent through a UI to allow use of their owned resources on the OP's server) both:

• An id_token, for authentication - which should never be used again in server calls, except as a hint during logout, when its expiration is not important anymore, and so, for the reasons above should be let to expire, and never be refreshed.
• An access_token - which later on, when calling an API, can be given to the OP's UserInfo endpoint. That will return the claims, and the API can authorize accordingly.

You can refresh this access_token, since it only tells the API what claims the user has, and what resources (by scopes and each scope's claims) the user agreed to give you. As explained above this is for allowing access even after the user is not logged in anymore. Of course you never wish to allow the id_token to be refreshed, because you don't want to allow impersonation without logging in.

If I understand correctly, according to this and the OpenID Connect Core 1.0 spec, the ID token itself can be stored in cookies as a mechanism to persist sessions, and sent with every authentication-requiring request to the Client. The Client can then verify the ID token either locally or through the Provider's verifier endpoint (if provided, like Google does). If the token is expired, it should make another auth request, except this time with prompt=none in the URL parameter. Also make sure to send the expired ID token in the id_token_hint parameter, otherwise the Provider may return an error.

So, it does seem natural for the ID Token to expire, but prompt=none ensures the new ID token can be obtained smoothly with no user intervention (unless of course the user is logged out of that OpenID).

TLDR;

Validate the ID token before trusting what it says.

More Details

What is intent of ID token expiry time in OpenID Connect?

The intent is to allow the client to validate the ID token, and the client must validate the ID token before operations that use the ID token's information.

From the OpenID Implicit Flow spec:

If any of the validation procedures defined in this document fail, any operations requiring the information that failed to correctly validate MUST be aborted and the information that failed to validate MUST NOT be used.

To corroborate that, Google's OpenID Connect documentation says this about ID token validation:

One thing that makes ID tokens useful is that fact that you can pass them around different components of your app. These components can use an ID token as a lightweight authentication mechanism authenticating the app and the user. But before you can use the information in the ID token or rely on it as an assertion that the user has authenticated, you must validate it.

So, if our client application is going to take some action based on the content of the ID token, then we must again validate the ID token.

Just share my journey. It's June, 2021. I'm writing this because I've stumbled into 3rd-party authentication business. I'm a veteran programmer but novice to security. In other words, all standards, spec, and terminologies are strangers, anybody can beat me in this field. Forgive me for not going by all the terms.

Cut to chase, I'm writing an Angular/Node app, so UI=Angular, API (API server)=Node/Express. Instead of creating my own Username/Password authentication, I'm turning to 3rd-party authentication, let them validate the genuineness of what the users claim they are. Here are two important guidebooks for me:

1. Angular Authentication With JSON Web Tokens (JWT): The Complete Guide
2. Eiji's Authenticate with a backend server

Combining No. 1 and angularx-social-login, I have the UI hooked up with Google, then attach idToken to API, vola! Following No. 2 using local library API can validate idToken, great!

Wait, idToken has exp expires in 1-hour. How do I refresh it?

My understanding is all I need is Google's authentication, I don't care what standard and version they use, but like others I just trust their authentication. Authentication is basically verify who they claim they are. Authorization is access control for what/where users can do/goto. The internal access control (allow users to do what) is not exposed to Google they have no idea of it. So accessToken should be out of the picture. Right?

I've spent days studying on how to refresh idToken now concluded Google does not recommend it nor angularx-social-login offers a way. In No. 2, Eiji has stated clearly:

Hence, solution for my situation is

• use Google's authentication.
• creates an own session management/timeout-rules at API after initial validation of idToken to mitigate exp.
• preferably add this session data into cookie with res.cookie("SESSIONID", myOwnID, {httpOnly:true, secure:true});

For better protection, Eiji also recommends Cross Account Protection. Hope this will help someone!