[OpenID-Specs-eKYC-IDA] Feedback needed

Leif Johansson leifj at sunet.se
Fri Jan 17 17:29:19 UTC 2020


Påls point (and mine) is that there is one already.

Skickat från min iPhone

> 17 jan. 2020 kl. 18:16 skrev Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten at lodderstedt.net>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> thanks for your feedback. We know the current state is not the perfect solution. 
> 
> Finding a sustainable solution is a key topic for the next revision of OpenId Connect for Identity Assurance. 
> 
> Please see https://bitbucket.org/openid/ekyc-ida/issues/1093/extensibility-how-do-we-support
> 
> As you can see ased on the discussion in the latest call, we are aiming at using IANA registries for the different element types. 
> 
> best regards,
> Torsten. 
> 
>> On 17. Jan 2020, at 17:26, Leif Johansson via Openid-specs-ekyc-ida <openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2020-01-16 17:46, Pål Axelsson via Openid-specs-ekyc-ida wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I subscribed to this list today due to that we're owrking with assurance
>>> framework within our academic federation in Sweden. Today we uses SAML
>>> and signal assurance certifications. When we start to use OpenID Connect
>>> we want to be able to do that there to.
>>> 
>>> When I read the proposed standard earlier today I saw a large
>>> enumeration in the working materials. I think this is a bad practice to
>>> enumerate in the standard documentation due to these things tend to
>>> change and then there will be a need to update the standard. The
>>> enumeration should instead be in an external registry, for example IANA
>>> registry over Level of Assurance (LoA) Profiles
>>> (https://www.iana.org/assignments/loa-profiles/loa-profiles.xhtml).
>>> 
>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption.
>>> 
>>> Pål Axelsson
>> 
>> As the author of RFC6711 I can tell you that you're not wrong. The
>> way we setup the LOA registry was to be able to handle multiple
>> protocol - something I'm sure john bradley could attest to aswell
>> since he was also involved.
>> 
>> In fact I think I might mentioned the registry to Torsten @ IIW
>> last fall :-)
>> 
>>    Cheers Leif
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------ Originalmeddelande ------
>>> Från: "Torsten Lodderstedt via Openid-specs-ekyc-ida"
>>> <openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>> <mailto:openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>>
>>> Till: "OpenID eKYC Identity Assurance Working Group"
>>> <openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>> <mailto:openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>>
>>> Kopia: "Torsten Lodderstedt" <torsten at lodderstedt.net
>>> <mailto:torsten at lodderstedt.net>>
>>> Skickat: 2020-01-16 17:34:19
>>> Ämne: Re: [OpenID-Specs-eKYC-IDA] Feedback needed
>>> 
>>>> Hi Naohiro,
>>>> 
>>>> good question. 
>>>> 
>>>> I would go with Wikipedia‘s
>>>> definition: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction
>>>> 
>>>> And for every jurisdiction list the respective law(s) + further use cases.
>>>> 
>>>> Ronald just raised the question about a use case repository. I think
>>>> this nicely fits together. 
>>>> 
>>>> We could setup a sub page listing the laws/use cases that were
>>>> implemented using OIDC4IDA and how.
>>>> 
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> best regards,
>>>> Torsten.
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 16.01.2020 um 10:35 schrieb Naohiro Fujie via
>>>>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida <openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>>>> <mailto:openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello Torsten,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Any criteria to list up jurisdictions? OpenID Foundation Japan have
>>>>> listed up financial and telco related laws earlier, but there are more
>>>>> laws require identity assurance.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Naohiro
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2020年1月16日(木) 1:29 Torsten Lodderstedt via Openid-specs-ekyc-ida
>>>>> <openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>>>> <mailto:openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> we have so far checked OpenID Connect 4 Identity Assurance in detail
>>>>>> against the requirements and use cases of certain jurisdictions (JP
>>>>>> & DE) or are expecting such feedback from other jurisdictions (UK,
>>>>>> Scandinavia, Australia).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We are seeking for detailed review feedback regarding applicability
>>>>>> of OpenID Connect 4 Identity Assurance from other jurisdictions
>>>>>> since we want to make sure we develop a truly International standard.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We would highly appreciate any feedback!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>> Torsten.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida mailing list
>>>>>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>>>>> <mailto:Openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>
>>>>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ekyc-ida
>>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida mailing list
>>>>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>>>>> <mailto:Openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net>
>>>>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ekyc-ida
>>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ekyc-ida at lists.openid.net
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ekyc-ida
> 


More information about the Openid-specs-ekyc-ida mailing list