[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [imi] Token profile issue with AppliesTo and AudienceRestriction
The STS (WS-Trust) is under the model that the Server Makes Right, just because the RST has it there is ZERO guarantee that the RSTR will reflect any of the RST From: John Bradley [mailto:jbradley@mac.com] The wsp:AppliesTo element in the RST is set by the user agent based on the card. The issuer has three choices 11.7 The Issuer has complete control over everything but the optional case. I think if the issuer has issued a Auditing or Auditing optional card they MUST honour the ic:RequireAppliesTo in the RST. If that is not a requirement of the SAML 1.1 tokens I will need to revisit the ICAM profile. We would need to make it a requirement if it is not covered in the IMI spec. We say the card must have the ic:RequireAppliesTo, I don't think we called out that the STS must honour it. If the RP issues unscoped tokens it shouldn't issue cards that say they support scoped tokens. John B. On 2009-12-15, at 3:13 PM, Mike Jones wrote: The SAML 2.0 token profile currently says: If the request contains a <wsp:AppliesTo> element, then a <saml:AudienceRestriction> containing a <saml:Audience> element MUST be included with the value of that element. As part of the review of the draft SAML 1.1 token profile, Arun Nanda commented: “This is overkill IMO. If an IdP is an open IdP that issues ‘unscoped’ tokens for consumption by any RP, it should not be forced to encode an audience in the issued token just because the request included it. So, may be SHOULD is preferred here…” I tend to agree with Arun. I think we should make this change. That’s the language I’m using in the 1.1 profile. After discussion, I’ll file an issue about this too. -- Mike |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]