RE: [security-services] the Time Issue

[Irving Reid <Irving.Reid@baltimore.com>]

> From: Hal Lockhart [mailto:hal.lockhart@entegrity.com]

> I can see no scenario in SAML where this is required or even
> desirable. I suggest we adopt as an explicit non-goal the
> ability to convert the contents of an assertion to a local
> format and back. If you need the orginal for some purpose
> such as audit, just keep a copy. Does the time precision
> issue still exist if this non-goal is accepted?

I agree with making round-tripping support a non-goal, though XML-DSIG may
be clearly enough specified to make the issue moot.

There is still a possible issue with time precision; if I send you an
assertion with more precision than you can handle, your interpretation may
differ from what I intended. That said, it would be unwise of me to send out
assertions that are dependent on a point like this.

On today's call, we came up with the idea of saying "Send whatever precision
you want, but don't rely on the other end understanding any more than
milliseconds."

 - irving -


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended 
for the addressee(s) only.  If you have received this message in error or 
there are any problems please notify the originator immediately.  The 
unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is 
strictly forbidden. Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct, 
special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the 
contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being 
passed on.

 
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by 
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.