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

Kantara Initiative Identity Assurance WG Teleconference


IAWG Approved 2014-07-24


Date and Time


  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
  2. AOB
  3. Adjourn


Link to IAWG Roster

As of 2014 May 6, quorum is 7 of 11


Meeting achieved quorum




  • Rich Furr ( C)
  • Andrew Hughes (S)
  • Devin Kusek
  • Richard Wilsher
  • Scott Shorter
  • Cathy Tilton
  • Adam Madlin






    • Paul Calatayud (V-C)

Notes & Minutes


Minutes Approval

IAWG Meeting Minutes 2014-07-03

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


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.




Next Meeting