Kantara Initiative Identity Assurance WG Teleconference
|Table of Contents|
DRAFT Meeting Minutes - IAWG approval required
Date and Time
- Date: Thursday, 2017-04-06
- Time: 12:00 PST | 15:00 EST (time zone calculator)
- Please join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/380672837
- Overview of re-organized IAWG wiki space (Ruth).
- Update on the initiative to create a structure mapping between the KI IAF and other frameworks towards the improvement of comparability (Andrew).
- 800-63-3 comment period deadline extension (Ken).
Link to IAWG Roster
As of 2017-03-16, quorum is 4 of 8 (see list box below for voting members)
Meeting did not achieve quorum
- Ken Dagg (C)
- Andrew Hughes
- Denny Prvu (S)
- Ken Crowl
- Ruth Puente
Notes & Minutes
- Ken Crowl commented about K(NO)W IDENTITY CONFERENCE 2017 that will be held on May 15th - 17th, in Washington, DC Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center.
Update on the initiative to create a structure mapping between the KI IAF and other frameworks towards the improvement of comparability (Andrew).
- During the TIIME Meeting in Vienna, February 2017 it was discussed the need to work together and find common ground within the informal profiles based or inspired in KI IAF, such as Incommon, GEANT, eIDAS, etc. The interested parties will meet during Internet2 Global Summit (April 23-26, WDC US) and start creating a straw man for a structure mapping between the frameworks and the KI IAF, including a common catalogue of risks.
- Andrew Hughes commented that during the TIIME un-conference session, the discussion was focused on the various research and education federations that have profiled or adopted the KI IAF, and we have agreed to further discuss how much commonality do we have between the different frameworks and what should we do collectively and individually. Andrew is preparing the material for the group.
- He is making an analysis of the SAC and found that the service assessment criteria (SAC) are the second artifact that should exist for our CSP. The first artifact is the standard or the requirement that the CSP must meet and the criteria should be the test or the evidence required to show to the assessor that the CSP is meeting the requirement. The requirement is implied in the criteria but not stated. He is sampling some of the criteria groupings, what may look if we try to document the implied requirement. Can we come up with a collectively stated standard for what is required as a credential manager, registration agent, and verifier, Relying Party?. Each federation would have to write its own profile, so creating a meta framework would be easy. The sampling would available to share with IAWG before the meeting in Washington.
- Ken Dagg commented that regarding comment #1067, he does not see that sub issues b)* and d)** have been addressed in the two references made in the "will be resolved via" section. He believes that both are significant issues that need to be addressed before rev. 3 is published.
- Ruth will send the pdf version to the list.
- Date: Thursday, 2017-04-13
- Time: 12:00 PT | 15:00 ET