Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


Voting Participants: Mark King, Mark Hapner, Richard Wilsher, Ken Dagg, Martin Smith

Non-voting participants: Tim Reiniger, James Jung

Guests: Tony Seymour

Staff: Colin Wallis, Ruth Puente

Quorum: 3 out of 5. There was quorum.


Agenda


1.Administration:
a.Roll Call
b.Agenda Confirmation
c.Minutes approval 2021-03-04 DRAFT Minutes

2. Discussion

a. Consider necessary changes to subject-focused criteria.
b. Second Phase of Australian Government Consultation on the Digital Identity Legislation - Kantara comments on draft position papers: 
Scope and interoperability Position Paper
Liability Framework;
Administration of Charges for Digital Identity; 
Privacy and other safeguards
Governance of the System; 
3. Any Other Business 


Minutes Approval

2021-03-04 Minutes were approved by motion. Moved: Martin Smith Seconded: Mark King. Unanimous approval.


Second Phase of Australian Government Consultation on the Digital Identity Legislation - Kantara comments on draft position papers: 

Administration of Charges for Digital Identity Position Paper

  • Ken commented that legislation is not the ideal place but the high level determinations should be clear. They should clarify who is responsible, who is going to pay what... 
  • Mark King said that providers should negotiate with the assessors and not have a a fixed fee by the government. Kantara's model will be suggested. 

Privacy and Other Safeguards Position Paper

  • Mark King supports the prohibition on creating a single identifier for individuals but wonders if a User could choose to reuse an existing one. That is, an identifier that is already in their possession.
  • Mark King said we should suggest the implementation of Kantara's consent receipt spec.

Governance of the System Including Oversight Authority Position Paper

  • Martin and Mark King commented on the brand recognition. Ken added that the transportability should also been considered in the cross recognition. 
  • Martin commented that there should be more clarity on liability regarding relying parties. 
  • Ruth added that in the Kantara RAKS it s required that the assessors have an insurance cover in place and it is requested every year. There is not such obligation for the CSP in the TMLA, but it will be implemented on the next version.

Ken will make the final pass on the comments so Ruth can submit the comments before the deadline on Tuesday CoB. 


Consider necessary changes to subject-focused criteria

  • Discussion on CO_SAC revision continued. Richard made the suggested revisions to KIAF 1410 CO_SAC v3.0.2. 
  • It was agreed that the changes are not material, so they won't require a 45 comment period neither AMB. The revisions were made under the purpose of clarifying criteria in the context of component services assessments and it has been  introduced the idea of a component service consumer.  
  • Next discussion will take place on March 25th, which will include the Kantara 63-3 SACs. 



  • No labels