[DG-Concordia] AuthnContext & PAPE & ICAM

[Paul Madsen]

On the topic of the relevance of RequestedAuthnContext, this SAML 
profile (http://saml2int.org/profile/current) recommends against 
RequestedAuthnContext - citing interop concerns.

But surely the argument that authncontext complicates interop could be 
used against any policy parameter....

Paul

On 12/14/2009 8:08 PM, RL 'Bob' Morgan wrote:
>
>> The other thing to remember is that the user can't be allowed 
>> administrative access to the account if they are authenticated at the 
>> lower LoA without compromising the Higher LoA.   That is something I 
>> would look for as an assessor for a multi LoA IdP.
>
> It is important to distinguish "multiple LoAs for the IdP as a whole, 
> one LoA per user" from "multiple LoAs per user".  The former, it seems 
> to me, is going to be the case in any organization of any significant 
> size. Multiple LoAs per user is definitely trickier and less obviously 
> needed, though still relatively common (e.g. at my university many 
> people have two-factor devices they use for more sensitive apps in 
> addition the plain old username/password they use for all other apps).
>
> I don't know that I agree with your concern above in general, though.  
> Our users have some kinds of "administrative access" to their accounts 
> (update mailing address, eg, or change password) via LoA2 
> (-equivalent) login. This doesn't affect the quality of their 
> two-factor (LoA3-equiv) login, as far as I can see.
>
>  - RL "Bob"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DG-Concordia mailing list
> DG-Concordia at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-concordia
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/dg-concordia/attachments/20091215/4daaa17b/attachment.html