OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: question on MNI request for SP Lite/IdP Lite

For this year’s Liberty SAML IOP event, we are adding a new error test case for SP Lite and IdP Lite applications. Per the SAML conformance specification, SP Lite and IdP Lite MUST NOT support Name ID management messaging and functionality. As some of the vendor products allow their applications to be switched from SP to SP Lite mode (same with IdP and IdP Lite), we need to fully test this “switch” and verify they are properly acting in the SP Lite/IdP Lite mode.


To do this, we are expanding the error test tool. Once the ETT has established a SSO with the SP Lite/IdP Lite with a persistent name ID, we plan on generating a MNIRequest attempting to change the name ID. I have two questions which I would like feedback from SSTC on…


1. When a SP Lite/IdP Lite receives a MNIRequest, what should be their proper response? Ignore the request? Generate an error <Status> response? Either is acceptable?


2. After generating the MNIRequest, I planned on verifying the SP Lite/IdP Lite did not accept the name ID change by sending a LogoutRequest using the new name ID from the MNIRequest message and looking for the error <Status> response that the SP Lite/IdP Lite does not recognize the principal. Then, send the LogoutRequest using the original name ID from the Response message and verifying principal is successfully logged out. Does this sound like a reasonable test scenario?




Kyle Meadors

Drummond Group Inc.

Principal, Test Process

(w) 615-212-0826

(c) 817-709-1627



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]