RE: ..the notorious bearer subject..

[Tim Moses <tim.moses@entrust.com>]

Title: RE: ..the notorious bearer subject..

Prateek - Now you have me confused.  I think "bearer" tokens are recognizable because their "authenticator" element is missing.  But, surely, the Web Browser profile needs this approach.  The authentication assertion referenced by the artifact is a bearer token.  N'est pas?  Best regards.  Tim.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mishra, Prateek [mailto:pmishra@netegrity.com]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 6:22 PM
To: 'bblakley@tivoli.com'; 'security-services@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: ..the notorious bearer subject..

Bob,
 
As part of crunching thru the third f2f
whiteboard draft, we find numerous
references to "bearer" as one possibility
for the subject element in an assertion.
 
Presumably, a bearer assertion
is one that can be simply presented
by whoever is "holding" it
and used without further proof of ownership.
 
(1) How do we model this at the XML-level ---
I assume it is enough to have an element
called <Bearer/> that can appear within the
<Subject> element.
 
(2) Is this really required within SAML?
What use-case did you have in mind?
 
 
- prateek