An open discussion list for topics related to the eduGAIN interfederation service.

[Niels van Dijk <niels.vandijk AT surfnet.nl>]

Hi Mikael, all,

Are there any additional usecases for this?

Although a see some value in the auto generation of discovery, I think
it is rather thin:
* The fact that the IdP claims support for CoC will still not
automagically warrant attribute release (I interpret "willing to release
attributes" not as "I am automatically releasing attributes" as is the
case for the R&S IdP statement, or do you plan to make that part of the
CoC of IdPs?). So if the SP want to "protect" users against ending up at
an IdP that will not allow them to login, the SP still needs to
configure its IdP list manually.
* In addition, I think very few services ever be interested in ALL CoC
IdPs, but only a subset releant to the service (because of community,
license etc). That again requires manually creating a list of relevant IdPs

I think there is much value in entity category statements in IdP
metadata, but I think the SPs would value much more for example a
statement on how the identity was vetted or other LOA related
information. That said, I am well aware that is not something achieved
overnight, and maybe having this IdP CoC attribute is low hanging fruit.

Cheers,
Niels

On 23-06-14 15:43, Mikael Linden wrote:
> Dear eduGAIN,
> 
>  
> 
> Currently, the GÉANT Data protection Code of Conduct defines an entity
> category attribute just for SPs[1]. No entity category support attribute
> for IdPs is defined.
> 
>  
> 
> I would like to ask the community’s opinion if there is a need to
> complement the CoCo specification by defining also the EC support
> attribute for IdPs. The semantics would be “As an IdP, I’m willing to
> release attributes to the SPs committed to the GÉANT Data protection
> Code of Conduct”. The use case would obviously be assembling a proper
> IdP Dicovery service in the SP side.
> 
>  
> 
> The reason for the hesitation so far has been a possible interference of
> the multiple EC support attributes of an IdP, but that issue has been
> discussed in the REFEDS list [2]. The conclusion was that if an IdP
> asserts support to multiple ECs, they are interpreted separately and
> independently. For instance, if an IdP has both the CoCo and R&S support
> attributes, it means “this IdP releases attributes to an SP that asserts
> R&S and, independent of that, to an SP that asserts CoCo”.
> 
>  
> 
> The CoCo support attribute would still leave an opportunity to the IdP
> to decide,
> 
> - what is the maximum list of attributes to release (although the
> cookbook gives an idea[3])
> 
> -  if the IdP wants to make an exception for some SPs (I think we can’t
> avoid this anyway).
> 
>  
> 
> Looking forward to receiving your input!
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mikael (the CoCo flywheel)
> 
>  
> 
> [1]
> http://www.geant.net/uri/dataprotection-code-of-conduct/V1/Documents/GEANT_DP_CoC_Entity_Category_ver1%200_0614.pdf
> 
> [2] https://www.terena.org/mail-archives/refeds/msg03847.html
> 
> [3] https://wiki.edugain.org/Recipe_for_a_Home_Organisation
> 
> --
> 
> Dr. Mikael Linden
> Senior application specialist, CISSP
> CSC - IT Center for Science Ltd.
> P.O. BOX 405, FI-02101 Espoo, Finland
> +358 40 507 4100, mikael.linden AT csc.fi <mailto:mikael.linden AT csc.fi>
>