Re: [saml-dev] empty <ds:X509Certificate/> element?

["Tom Scavo" <trscavo@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu> wrote:
>> Is this legal?  Is it advisable?
>
> It's schema valid, but only in the strictly pedantic way that an empty
> string is (which I bet also breaks a lot of code lying around). I'd be
> surprised if it didn't break things, and it doesn't really mean anything, so
> I don't think it would be advisable.

So maybe I'm misunderstanding the semantics of SubjectConfirmation in
a SAML request.  I take it to mean the requester would like to have an
assertion containing such a SubjectConfirmation, not that the IdP
should so confirm the presenter.  Which is correct?

Thanks,
Tom