/
IAWG Meeting Minutes 2014-07-10

IAWG Meeting Minutes 2014-07-10

Jul 24, 2014

Kantara Initiative Identity Assurance WG Teleconference

1 Date and Time | 2 Agenda | 3  Attendees | 4 Minutes Approval | 5 Discussion | 6 AOB | 7 Next Meeting

 

IAWG Approved 2014-07-24

 

Date and Time

Agenda

  1. Administration:

    1. Roll Call

    2. Agenda Confirmation

    3. Minutes approval: IAWG Meeting Minutes 2014-07-03

    4. Staff reports and updates

    5. Discussion of 'US Government Profile', FICAM TFPAP deadlines in August and structure/form of the SAC

    6.  

  2. AOB

    1.  

  3. Adjourn

 Attendees

Link to IAWG Roster

As of 2014 May 6, quorum is 7 of 11

 

Meeting achieved quorum

 

 

Voting

  • Rich Furr ( C)

  • Andrew Hughes (S)

  • Devin Kusek

  • Richard Wilsher

  • Scott Shorter

  • Cathy Tilton

  • Adam Madlin

  •  

Non-Voting

  •  

Staff

  •  

Regrets

Notes & Minutes

Administration 

Minutes Approval

IAWG Meeting Minutes 2014-07-03

Motion to approve minutes of 2014-07-03: Furr
Seconded: Tilton
Discussion: None
Motion Carried 

Discussion

Discussion on the structure of the the FICAM v2 Profile

  • Option: structure the SAC as a 'language and primitives for creating profiles'

    • then create a profile from these primitives

  • Observation: the 'US Government Profile' draft is not in the right format, and does not relate to the SACs

    • Therefore it isn't a profile of the SAC and does not meet the needs of Kantara assessments

  • ARB is talking about looking at the SAC and their relationship to 800-63

  • The FICAM TFS Assessment Team assess the TFPs against the FICAM requirements - so that might be a more direct path to meeting the FICAM Approval requirements

  • However, the Kantara SAC are in the Approved FICAM scope. And the SAC are used to assess CSPs. Since the SAC are mapped to 800-63 it means that these CSPs can be FICAM Approved as well

  • Challenge is that the SAC are probably too tightly bound to 800-63 and limits their applicability to situations that are not based on 800-63. e.g. UK, Canada

    • The path forward would need a profile to express the UK GPG in SAC terms

  • A Kantara Assessment, by definition, must be against the Kantara SAC

  • IAWG should take this discussion to the ARB to seek guidance on intent and plans for the IAF and SAC

  • Can we go forward with approval of the IAF 3410 profiling document? Or do we have to settle the other discussion first?

  • Q: what would the problem be in the US if Kantara used the FICAM criteria directly?

    • A: As defined today, it would not follow the rules of the Kantara AAS

  • ACTION: Andrew to do the work needed is to determine if the FICAM requirement is the same, greater or less than the SAC

  • ACTION: Scott to try another approach to 'de-LOA' the criteria and use the profile to express the FICAM Profile

    • Try out a first draft of IAF 3410 on a sample of criteria and see how the process works

    • Bring back the sample profile to the IAWG for discussion

  • ACTION: Furr to request information from Government of Canada about what criteria are not compatible with their approach

  • ACTION: Wilsher to rev the 3410 by accepting all changes so we have a clean copy to work from.

AOB

 

 

Next Meeting