Attendees: Richard Wilsher, Ken Dagg, Martin Smith, SATO Hiroyuki, Mark Hapner, Ruth Puente.
Apologies from Andrew Hughes, Nathan Faut and Björn Sjöholm
Key discussion items
- Ken thanked ID.me for sponsoring the work to develop 63C SAC. He said that the sub-group work would take about 8 weeks before the 63C SAC draft enters the Kantara approval processes. Thus, the plan is to get the document approved at the beginning of July 2020.
- Richard walked the participants through 63C_SAC draft v0.1.0 KIAF-1450 SP 800-63C Service Assessment Criteria v0.1.0.xlsx
- Martin asked the meaning of the Column headings and the difference between Fed ID and FA. Richard clarified that "Fed IdP" is meant to be the US Federal Agencies and "FA" is Authority Federation.
- In relation to FA, Richard remarked that according to the talk he had with NIST colleagues, FA is the entity responsible meet the requirements and who determines what the Federation participants should comply with. Furthermore, there is a criterion that stipulates that the FA must produce a Federation Agreement, which establishes what the participants in the Federation should do. Moreover, it should include policy, terms and conditions. He added that this requirements is beyond NIST guidelines. SATO supported the idea that the FA is a single party that set the rules and that the governance of the Federation should be specified and defined.
- Richard said that a possible requirement for the Federation could be that he entity must be Kantara approved.
- Richard clarified that the 63C NIST guidelines if for US Federal Agencies.
- It was said that Proxy is the same as broker but NIST avoided the latter as it may have other implications.
- Next Meeting: March 11th.
Action Items:
- Richard to send the revised version to the Sub-group mailing list.
- Participants to prepare comments for the next meeting.