[OpenID-Specs-eKYC-IDA] Feedback needed

Leif Johansson leifj at sunet.se
Fri Jan 17 17:35:10 UTC 2020


Probably not but IANA/IESG is gona review and will also notice and push back on overlap.

Skickat från min iPhone

> 17 jan. 2020 kl. 18:30 skrev Torsten Lodderstedt <torsten at lodderstedt.net>:
> 
> I know. My point is, we have several different elements in our data model where we seek extensibility for. Can we put all of those into this single registry?
> 
>> On 17. Jan 2020, at 18:29, Leif Johansson <leifj at sunet.se> wrote:
>> 
>> 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