FW: SAML Conformance Question

Anybody know the answer to John’s question?

Hal

From: John Slocum [mailto:jslocum@ipswitch.com]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 10:24 AM
To: Hal Lockhart
Subject: RE: SAML Conformance Question

Good morning Hal,

Would you mind posting the following to the SAML committee list, on my behalf? (This constitutes my permission)

Thank you,

John

Hello SAML Committee,

I’d like to introduce myself as a product manager responsible for an SSO implementation in a managed file transfer solution to support SAML 2.0 integration, and I am trying to better understand the integration requirements to claim conformance to operational mode SP Lite. I have reviewed the following document thoroughly: http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-conformance-2.0-os.pdf

I am looking for clarification on SP Lite conformance requirements with regard to the Enhanced Client/Proxy SSO, PAOS requirement in table 2 of the above linked document (which is a MUST for all operational modes of conformance). Our binding communicates via passed xml, in similar fashion to SOAP, but with slightly different schema. Our app also does not interact with ECPs that aren’t ours, or that aren’t using our custom binding. We are planning to authenticate 3^rd party ECPs via API instead.

Is there any allowance for custom bindings or non-standard bindings, other than SOAP? Asked another way: as a service provider attempting to develop a conforming integration, must we specifically have a SOAP interface to our app supporting our ECP SSO (and not 3^rd party ECP) in order to claim conformance to SP Lite requirements?

Thank you,

John Slocum

security-services message