...
Ken reminded WG participants that Kantara staff is ready to help them publicize their newsworthy activities and via the @KantaraNews Twitter handle. Or send to Ken D or Kay C.
Discussion:
Ken suggested reversing the order of the Agenda's discussion items to address the decision items first.
c. Ken – any interest or thoughts? Mark King – really about governments, bit on certification is TBD. Suggest not agreeing but reconsider at a later IAWG to decide. Ken-- maybe Kay could raise the lack of a certification process via informal call. KAY: I do know one of the POCs. Ken: have been trying to get involved for several years, but OIX has had inside track and apparently discouraged UK cabinet office to ignore Kantara. action: Kay to contact and return. (Allison is Kay's contact?) Reconsidber at end of August. b. Ken: discuss PAD issue. Might be oppty to enhance relationship with GSA. Roger Q: several people coming up with various tools Good opportunity. Move until next meeting in 2 weeks. JJ : have used PAD but it's a different kind of assessment–deeper. Sounds like a lab standards issue. RQ: agree. Interested to hear what Richard is thinking. Ken-- would be part of the rolled-up approval package. Kay: meeting with GSA Phil next week but won't raise this unless he does. UK Government Cabinet Office draft paper on "Digital identity and attributes", response due 13 Sept.--Ken asked for WG views on whether and how IAWG should respond. Mark King noted that the paper did not address the issue of most direct concern to Kantara, namely whether the UK framework would include a process for certification of scheme participants (mainly CSPs.) Given that, he suggested the WG wait and see if an opportunity to address this issue might present itself. Ken D. wondered if Kay C., using the occasion of her appointment as Exec Director, might contact the UK program leads and indicate Kantara's interest in providing input regarding a certification process. He observed that Kantara had been trying for some time, with limited success, to establish a productive relationship with the UK Government, and this might provide a fresh start with a new face representing Kantara. Kay C. noted she is acquainted with one of the UK program managers via their participation in Women in Identity. It was agreed she would make a contact in her new Kantara role, mention Kantara's interest in providing input to the UK program (in particular from the perspective of our experience in operating a certification process), and assess opportunities to develop the relationship. Ken suggested we should would return to the issue of a possible response to the UK consultation call in late August, perhaps with some additional input from Kay's contact.
b. GSA question about Kantara criteria referencing "presentation attack detection" (PAD), and possible clarification of the relevant Kantara criteria. Ken provided brief background on the question from GSA (Phil Lam, speaking with Kay C.) that came up since the last WG meeting, and said this might be an opportunity to enhance our relationship with GSA. He asked for any thoughts from the WG. Roger Q. said several vendors had come up with ideas for detecting/mitigating presentation attacks, and so focus on this by Kantara is timely. Jimmy J. said he has applied PAD, but that it's a bit different from regular assessment activity and may be more like a laboratory standards issue. Roger Q. agreed, and said he'd been very interested in seeing the language Richard has come with so far. Ken suggested we should defer this issue also to the next meeting when Richard should be available. Ken confirmed that if IAWG were to develop new or clarifying criteria language related to GSA's question he would expect to make it part of the package of revisions we are working to submit for approval this summer. Kay C. mentioned that she is meeting again with Phil Lam, but has other issue to discuss and would not raise this; Ken suggested that if Phil raised it, she might tell him the IAWG is actively considering it and expects to be able to get back to him soon.
A. Ken: roadmap. process requires 45 + 15 + LC approval. So maybe 2 1/2 months. Nice to get published by October. So, beginning of August. Impossible. November then. So prepped by and of August. "Comparables" plus maybe PAD plus misc by end August of possible.
...