[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] Signatures in protocols (section 3 of core)
> >protocol binding (see [SAMLBind]). The SAML request MAY be signed, which > >provides both authentication of the requester and message integrity. > > > I am fine with the MAY if this is not a duplicated requirement from some > other part of [SAMLCore], otherwise, I think this text should just be > informative. I don't think it really was called out anywhere very prominently, or at least not until the section on signatures later. Since this came first, I thought I'd try and say whatever we wanted to say with some boilerplate text in the schema definition section. The part I was trying to emphasize was that if you don't sign, that doesn't mean you can't get integrity some other way. Thanks for the suggestions, Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]