Status and next steps
- April 13th Ben Wilson sent to KI the following docs:
- updated version of the IDEF-IAF FICAM Federal Privacy Profile Mapping - IDESG marked “Confirmed” for the rows titled INTEROP-4: STANDARDIZED DATA EXCHANGES and INTEROP-7: USER REDRESS.
- IDEF-IAF Mapping Overview.
- Include Kantara onboarding in the Statement of Work for the next version of the IDEF Registry web site.
- The form that recognition of Kantara-approved CSPs during the IDEF registration process still needs to be decided. If it can’t be an interactive experience (due to site-development budget issues), it could at least be a static presentation in HTML or PDF.
- Once we get the above going, part of the process would be that Kantara-approved CSPs initiate registration and get a “pass” on the “Fully Compliant” items, then they will attest to the remaining IDEF Baseline criteria. Finally, they will need to accept the standard terms and conditions and submit a complete package (attestation form).
- In relation to the HTML/Static representation, KI suggested following the example of our Trust Registry: https://kantarainitiative.org/trust-registry/ktr-status-list/
- Next meeting: TBC
April 3rd Meeting Notes:
- We discussed that once a CSP is approved at Kantara, in essence they will be offered the opportunity to self attest at IDESG.
- They will choose one of 2 URLs. One URL is pre-filled with boxes ticked if they have done Kantara's 1400 SACs approval.
- The other URL is pre-filled with boxes ticked if they have done Kantara's 1400 SACs approval AND the FICAM Privacy Profile.
- IDESG will queue up the URL/web work on its upcoming work order.
- The URLs will be hosted by IDESG. If required by IDESG, they will ask Kantara to validate that a CSP has been approved.
- Ben will fill in the last remaining empty boxes on the compare tool to complete the mapping.
- Colin will use a Kantara MOU template to strawman up the broad approach.
IDESG and KI call to discuss the IDEF-SAC mapping March 10th.
- Andrew and David recounted the approaches used by each team to analyse, review and comment on the mapping
- We looked at each item that TFTM had further questions about, notes on each one follow:
1) INTEROP-2 - Kantara should indicate in the S3A that if the CSP intends to apply for IDEF Registry listing that they include an answer to INTEROP-2 in their S3A
2) INTEROP-3 - this is a trigger on IDESG side - if an applicant to the Registry is using a non-listed standard this should trigger IDESG to put the standard through the normal evaluation process
3) PRIVACY-3 - Kantara should review data minimization criteria to see where this is handled - “Partial” might be possible instead of N/A
4) PRIVACY-15 - The IDEF requirements is relevant to the transaction. David explained the context that he expects -> Data Minimization. Andrew requested that IDESG review and update their requirement and supplemental guidance for P15. David noted that there is no supplemental guidance for the Privacy requirements.
- ACH asked David to send info to Kantara about how other CSPs have done this and Kantara can recommend to CSPs.