[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: Requirement for Isolated Request for Authorization Atributes
I think the point is that SAML will make no attempt to standardise the contents of assertions like this. - irving - > From: Philip Hallam-Baker [mailto:pbaker@verisign.com] > Subject: RE: Requirement for Isolated Request for Authorization > Atributes > > OK maybe I should have said 'appears to be out of scope but > attempting to > prevent a user from making such an assertion will require > specific effort'. > > Phillip Hallam-Baker > > From: Darren Platt [mailto:dplatt@securant.com] > > Subject: RE: Requirement for Isolated Request for Authorization > > Atributes > > > > I do not believe this is currently considered in scope (by > > the requirements > > group anyway), nor should it be: > > > > > "Any party with the rights identifier PQR is authorized to > > access the file > > > xyz.html" > > > Appears to be in scope but is very definitely a policy > > > statement
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC