- DG-AM - mailman.kantarainitiative.org

v1.1 of the draft report
by Heather Flanagan 26 Feb '12

26 Feb '12

Hi all - Thanks to your excellent feedback, the wiki and word doc have been significantly updated. That does not, however, mean I'm done pestering you about it yet! I'm focusing on the section regarding Protocols which currently states: --- Protocols How do you move attributes around? Efforts in this space: SAML OAuth --- Do we actually have anything to say there with regards to gaps and/or recommendations? If not, I'll take that section out entirely. We do have a guest on our call next week, so we won't have a whole lot of time to devote to going over the draft. Please take a few minutes to read it over and send me your comments so we can focus our time next week on Don Thibeau and his thoughts on the attribute space. Thanks! -Heather

2 3

a question about trust frameworks
by Heather Flanagan 20 Feb '12

20 Feb '12

Hi all - I'm trying to flesh out the section of our report referencing Trust Frameworks. Right now, the draft text is: --- h2. Trust frameworks Quite a bit of work has gone in to Identity Assurance, with different levels of assurance certifications described by different standards bodies, auditors trained, and a general understanding of the concept shared. That said, finding a trust framework that extends down to the level of the attributes themselves is still a work in progress. An individual could have a mix of self-asserted and proofed attributes describing them, and a consumer of those attributes should be able to determine which attribute comes with a higher level of assurance. --- I know of some interesting work by ABC4Trust, but that's more about privacy, not LOA. Then the Trust Framework stuff going on in OIX, but that's seems to be bigger-picture work (tho' perhaps that's because I only see the publicly released documentation). What should we be linking to in the report that would indicate works in progress, or is this still a fairly open field? thanks! -Heather

2 2

OpenID/OIX brief 28 February call 11h PT / 14h ET / 19h UTC
by Salvatore D'Agostino 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

Thanks Don for agreeing to give an update on our dg-am call. The agenda will follow. Sal

1 0

specific feedback sought for report - schema
by Heather Flanagan 17 Feb '12

17 Feb '12

I have links to work in the higher ed space regarding attribute managements. Do we have anything similar to use for the commercial and government sectors available? I'm not seeing anything in the repository and I know there is work being done out there... h2. Common language - Schema h3. Efforts in this space: Higher Education * [the eduPerson schema|http://middleware.internet2.edu/eduperson/] \\ Commercial * ??? \\ Government * ??? \\

5 4

update on draft report
by Heather Flanagan 15 Feb '12

15 Feb '12

Hi all - After a bit of snooping, I found out that there is actually a required format for a discussion group report. I've made a few changes to the wiki page to help facilitate that creation of that format of our report, and have attached the v1.0 draft of the required Kantara word doc to the report page. It will be a bit tedious to keep both matched, but I think we're close enough to finishing the report that I can do that successfully. If you have any questions, please let me know! -Heather

1 0

eGov requirements for attributes, and report recommendations
by Heather Flanagan 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Hi all - I believe we've captured most of the items out of the eGov requirements for attributes in our report. As a reminder, those requirements (assuming I've found them all) are: Develop a common approach to protocol choice, implementation and subsequent deployment Schema Semantics (there are generic and industry-specific attribute code lists everywhere (LDAP, x500, OASIS CIQ, Health's HL7, InCommon etc) so let’s not re-invent anything..rather re-use something/s*****) and from this develop Metadata definition, and Level of Assurance criteria for attributes (http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/AMDG/Attribute+Requirements) We've mentioned schema and metadata, work on semantics and terminology, and LoA. We have not discussed how to develop a common approach to protocol choice, etc. I think that might actually a bit too detailed for what we're expected to accomplish in our discussion group, but someone may have a different opinion? I've also updated the recommendations section significantly based on our call today. http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/AMDG/Report+-+DRAFT#Report-… You know you can't wait to go review it. ;-) -Heather

1 0

REMINDER & AGENDA, DG-AM call 14-Feb-2012
by Heather Flanagan 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Hello all - The agenda for our call tomorrow is available online: http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/AMDG/AMDG+Meeting+Agenda+20… Call in information: * *Date:* Tuesday, February 14, 2012 * *Time:* 11h PT / 14h ET / 19h UTC * Dial in: * Skype: \+99051000000481 * US Dial-In: \+1-805-309-2350 \| Room Code: 613-2898 Our primary topic will be to review the draft report, so if you haven't had a chance to look it over, please do so before the call: http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/AMDG/Report+-+DRAFT Talk to you all tomorrow! Heather

2 3

Report status and input requested
by Heather Flanagan 13 Feb '12

13 Feb '12

Hi all - Thank you for the input this week. I've incorporated what seemed to be immediately relevant to the draft report. There is a section, however, that still needs significant attention: Protocols How do you move attributes around? (is there any more to the question of protocols other than the SAML and OAuth work?) Metadata ??? Trust frameworks Attribute Assurance Profiles - ???'' .. e.g. different LoA for attributes based if they are self reported or proofed at a high level (I know a lot more must be said on this one. I will be focusing my attention here since I know I have the documentation around somewhere) Consent (Is the work around consent actually a gap in the attribute management space, or does it belong somewhere else?) ??? Context (I think context has the potential to be very interesting, but may fit in to the Categorization under Semantics and terminology?) ??? Feedback encouraged, welcomed, begged for... -Heather

3 5

FYI: Steady progress on NZ citizen electronic access to their govt-held core identity credentials
by Colin Wallis 08 Feb '12

08 Feb '12

Folks FYI http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6381192/igovt-bill-passes-first-hu… Cheers Colin ==== CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Thank you. ====

1 0

More for the Report
by Colin Wallis 08 Feb '12

08 Feb '12

Folks I don't know how many of you got to hear/see this.. http://www.incommon.org/iamonline But today's presentation by Ken and Steven was excellent - even if you weren't in Higher Ed. Take a look at the slides. The discussion on attributes starts about half way through. Both presenters are well known and well regarded for their interest in attributes. Two things really struck me: 1) The notion of developing attribute Categories, which plays fair and square into our Attribute Management scope. Leif is heavily involved in that so I have cc'd him here.. 2) The Monetization of attributes, which, as the presenters pointed out, will need at the very least 'management' but maybe more along the lines of regulation, depending on how things develop on that front. Cheers Colin ==== CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Thank you. ====

2 1