UMA telecon 2022-09-15

Owned by Alec Laws
Last updated: Sep 15, 2022
2 min read

UMA telecon 2022-09-15

Date and Time

Agenda

  • Approve minutes since UMA telecon 2022-06-30

  • Core UMA content/report (no use-case)

  • FAPI Part 1 Review and Discussion

  • Policy Descriptions

  • AOB

Attendees

  • NOTE: As of October 26, 2020, quorum is 5 of 8. (Michael, Domenico, Peter, Sal, Thomas, Alec, Eve, Steve)

  • Voting:

  • Non-voting participants:

  • Regrets:

    • Nancy

Quorum: No



Meeting Minutes

 

Cancelled this meeting as there was some issues accessing the zoom bridge

Approve previous meeting minutes

Topics

Core UMA content (no use-case)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YU-AjYx6xmolHGowrlkC2fg_QRXjoP7BuAW7JuCaMM8/edit# (will need to request access)



FAPI Part 1 Review and Discussion

https://fapi.openid.net/ 

Part 1: Baseline https://openid.net/specs/openid-financial-api-part-1-1_0.html


https://openid.net/specs/openid-financial-api-part-2-1_0.html

 

Policy Descriptions



AOB

 

Potential Future Work Items / Meeting Topics

  • 100 FAPI Review (FAPI + UMA) 

    • scope: how the FAPI work could be applied to UMA ecosystems

    • review may inform what profiling work is required, eg if UMA must support PAR to work with FAPI

  • 20 Confluence clean up, archive old items and promote the latest & greatest

    • 10 UMA glossary – Steve has started 

  • 600 Review of the email-poc correlated authorization specification

  • 120 A financial use-case report (following the Julie healthcare template)

    • either open banking or pensions dashboard

    • openbanking is to FHIR(data model) as FAPI is to SMARTonFHIR(authZ protocol profile)

    • Who would lead this/ needs this for UMA in open banking contexts? Should come after FAPI review?

  • 300 mDL + UMA

    • scope: how mDL could work in UMA ecosystems, how mDL could be a claim to UMA 

    • is there a role for UMA in token fabrication and referencing it as the RS?

  • 500 UMA + GNAP https://oauth.xyz/specs/ 

    • would we have an UMA GNAP version (eg extension of GNAP or UMA? UMAonGNAP) 

    • will GNAP meet all the UMA outcomes?

  • 170 UMA + Verifiable Credentials

    • how would VCs work in an UMA ecosystem? How could VCs be used as claims in UMA

    • There are openapi specs for VC formats

    • Could UMA protect a VC presentation or issuance endpoint?

    • There's a lot of openid4vc profiles 

  • IDPro knowledge base articles

  • UMA 2 playground/sandbox

  • 150 Minor profiling work,

    • resource scopes → scopes 

    • PAR as dynamic scopes eg fhir query params

    • policy manager & policy description

    • 110 pushed claims types: templates + profiles (beyond IDTokens): 171 VCs, 113 consent, policy, mDL

      • use-case, consent as claims (needs_info),

        • if the client has gathered RqP consent, can it be presented to the AS

        • the policy to access a resource says "you must have agreed to this TOS/consent"

        • compare to interactive claims gathering where the AS would present this consent/TOS to the RqP

        • intersection with ANCR/consent receipt/trust registry work in other Kantara groups

Upcoming Conferences

  • IIW 35,  November 15 - 17