<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Spec Call Notes 14-Feb-19<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Brian Campbell<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">George Fletcher<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jeff Lombardo<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rich Levinson<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Roland Hedberg<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Torsten Lodderstedt<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mike Jones<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nat Sakimura<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">George Fletcher<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Tom Jones<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">OpenID Connect for Identity Proofing<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten submitted a draft this week<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> [Openid-specs-ab] OpenID Connect for Identity Proofing (Proposal)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The extension can convey user data and assurance, methods, processes, and evidence<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> There is need for this kind of strong identity proofing<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> There is a need to specify which claims are verified<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> And to convey both verified and non-verified claims<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten is using this for anti money laundering, for instance<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The requirements are written down in the introduction<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The extension has two parts<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Definition of additional claims<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Such as place of birth<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Syntax and semantics for requesting and providing verified claims<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> People are requested to review the doc by the Feb 28 call in two weeks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We will adopt it then unless objections are voiced<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: Minimum viable Electronic Know Your Customer (EKYC) work is being done in the EU<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We should align with that work<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The chair Stephane G Mouy is willing to work with us<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Presentations:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ls28l1ps53u2u2b/3.%20%20PriGroup%202%20Minimum%20Viable%20eKYC%20Framework%20Presentation%20-%20Final2%20%28002%29.pdf.pdf?dl=0<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> https://www.dropbox.com/s/b4egx1gxma8xh9x/LoA-rated%20Attribute%20Framework%20Proposal%20-%2020181017.pdf?dl=0<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The EKYC effort will report by the end of June to the EIDAS group in the EU<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten agrees that we should work with people from multiple jurisdictions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: The EU plan is to have the claims provider be separate from the IdP<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten is using this in practice<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The RP requests only the claims that it needs - in accordance with GDPR<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> A multi-faceted discussion of legal and regulatory requirements occurred<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> EU law requires that the recipient acquire specific claims about the verification<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The US AAMVA, however, requires that proofing be verified but the proofing data need not be acquired<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Different jurisdictions will use different procedures and legal frameworks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> George: What we're largely discussing is differences in business requirements<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Mike: It's up to implementers and deployers to comply with local legal and business requirements<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We as spec writers should supply tools helping them do that<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: What we write needs to be globally relevant<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten: We need to collect use cases from different jurisdictions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: In Japan, OIDF-J is doing EKYC work<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat asked whether this should be in the Connect WG or another one<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Mike said that the claims request and response syntax is an extension to Connect, so belongs here<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We should seek broad legal and policy review as we're doing the work<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Tom asked us to consider use cases in which additional information is requested outside the Connect authentication flow<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten: Distributed claims can be used for this<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> George: An attribute provider endpoint is different from the UserInfo Endpoint<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: We should define a mechanism for onboarding claims providers to OPs<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten: EIDAS imposes very specific legal requirements about verification processes and participants<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten particularly asks everyone to review the requirements in the introduction<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We're tackling a multi-dimensional problem<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat: This tackles one of the largest cost factors for financial institutions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten: This is true of anyone going digital, such as utilities, etc.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten asked if SecureKey can inform the working group of what the approach they're taking with IBM is<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Jeff agreed to look into this<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Federation Draft<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Roland told us that in the new federation draft, Federation Operators and other participants can enforce policy<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> For instance, only using EC crypto rather than RSA crypto<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> A new policy language has been incorporated that's informed by requirements from specific use cases<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Mike plans to publish the editor's draft to openid.net/specs/ draft 07 today<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Open Issues<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues?status=new&status=open<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> #1029 - authentication_failed error response<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten wrote a proposed draft doing this<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Nat requested that Torsten send an HTML attachment of the draft<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We can then make an adoption decision on the call in two weeks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> #1046 - Core 3.1.2.1. - id_token_hint<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Torsten asks us to sanction passing an ID Token as a login_hint value<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> We will discuss this more on the next call<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Next Call<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> 3pm Pacific Time on Monday, February 18th<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>