1 / 33

IdP Selection WG

Hillsboro, March 10th Version v0. IdP Selection WG. Agenda. Rollcall, Quorum Proposed models First achievements for Hillsboro plenary Charter Proposal for a unified WG (IDPS + ULX). Rollcall and quorum. Rollcall and Quorum. Voting Participants

linus-vasquez
Download Presentation

IdP Selection WG

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hillsboro, March 10th Version v0 IdP Selection WG

  2. Agenda • Rollcall, Quorum • Proposed models • First achievements for Hillsboro plenary • Charter Proposal for a unified WG (IDPS + ULX)

  3. Rollcall and quorum

  4. Rollcall and Quorum • Voting Participants • 1 Alam, Mohammad, Fraunhofer SIT joined as of February 18, 2010 07:50   • 2 Clement, Philippe, France Telecom joined as of July 30, 2009 12:02   • 3 Davis, Peter, NeuStar joined as of June 2, 2009 11:48   • 4 Gourmelen, Gael, France Telecom / Orange joined as of August 18, 2009 14:14   • 5 Kellomaki, Sampo, joined as of March 2, 2010 16:28   • 6 Rerup, Neil joined as of Oct. 31, 2009 15:13   • 7 Salzberg, Ken, Intel joined as of June 30, 2009 12:02   • 8 Sunday, Bob, Government joined of Canada as of October 23, 2009 6:25  

  5. Rollcall and Quorum Non-Voting Participants 11 Hardjono, Thomas joined as of June 24, 2009 09:35   12 Kannappan, Lena, FuGen Solutions, Inc. joined as of September 16, 2009 11:00   13 Lopez, Diego, RedIRIS joined as of June 23, 2009 16:32   14 Lynch, Lucy, Internet Society joined as of September 16, 2009 11:00   15 Schwartz, Michael, Gluu joined as of June 24, 2009 01:24   16 Shelley, Robert, N-Link Corporation joined as of June 24, 2009 12:17   17 Solberg, Andreas, UNINETT joined as of July 9, 2009 22:09   18 Soutar, Colin, CSC joined as of March 5, 2010 11:24   19 Tesson, Olivier joined as of June 24, 2009 04:13   20 Trilli, Kevin, TRUSTe joined as of September 23, 2009 21:27   21 Wallis, Colin,  Dept of Internal Affairs, NZ Government joined as of September 16, 2009 11:00 • Non-Voting Participants • 1 Adachi, Shin, NTT joined as of July 3, 2009 01:41   • 2 Adams, Trent, Internet Society joined as of February 24, 2010 08:06   • 3 Ar Foll, Fulup, Sun Microsystems joined as of September 16 2009 11:00   • 4 Bailleux, Benoit, France Telecom joined as of November 17, 2009 11:54   • 5 Baker, Richard joined as of September 8, 2009 12:14   • 6 Barbir, Abbie joined as of Dec. 24, 2009 06:17   • 7 Broser, Christian, SPIKE joined as of July 16, 2009 12:14 •  8 Cantor, Scott, Internet2 joined as of June 30, 2009, 10:44   • 9 Dagg, Kenneth, Government of Canada joined as of Feb. 24, 2010 05:20   • 10 Ganem, Herve joined as of September 16, 2009 11:00  

  6. Proposed Models

  7. Identified requirements • Input requirements identified in the IDP Selection MRD can be divided into 4 main categories : • Possibility for the SP to delegate the selection of the user's IDP to an ISA and express some criteria to be considered for that selection process. • Discovery of the user's preferred IDP(s) by ISAs. • Possibility for the ISA to obtain user's IDP(s) capabilities as well as other data (metadata). • GUI and UX guidelines for SP and ISA.

  8. Envisioned next step 1/2 • Delegate to the ISA • Extract from MRD all needed claims, both by IdP and by RP • Technical way to integrate the ISA on SP side using RP metadata (aim : same metadata for both ISA in the browser and in the network) • Discovery of the user's preferred IDP • Mainly internal to the ISA (to be assessed based on MRD) : should be described into an "ISA implementation guidelines" document (common guidelines for both ISA in the browser and in the network ?).

  9. Envisioned next step 2/2 • IDP's capabilities • Lacks in existing IdP metadata specifications already identified in the "Gap analysis" document : requires evolutions on these specifications. • E.g. • Supported authentication context by IDP • Logo and display name for each IDP • … • GUI and UX guidelines for SP and ISA. • Common guidelines for both ISA in the browser and in the network.

  10. Pending point to be discussed: which strategy ? • 3 possible models for an ISA in the network • The ISA as a facilitator : just allows the user to choose the IDP and everything else is done directly between RP and IDP • The ISA as an IDP proxy, as defined in the Liberty/SAML specifications • the ISA acts on behalf of the SP and just convert flows from a protocol to an other if needed

  11. ISA as a facilitator1/3 • Functional view Some metadata only * IDP Selection Delegation IDP RP ISA Metadata exchange & Authentication delegation * e.g. for the IDP capabilities discovery

  12. ISA as a facilitator 1/3 • Technical view • ISA used only during the IDP choice • The ISA is not aware of the rest of the transaction • The RP must implement all protocols corresponding to the various IDP Identity Provider Relying Party ISA     Note : numbers  to  represent the order of the interactions.

  13. ISA as an IDP proxy2/3 • Functionalview Metadata exchange & Authentication delegation Metadata exchange & IDP Selection & Authentication delegation IDP ISA RP RP IDP

  14. ISA as an IDP proxy 2/3 • Technical view User database • Protocol on link  and  can be any widely spread protocol. • As a proxy, the ISA must implement fully the chosen protocol(s) for links  and . • Possibly single protocol between ISA and RP • IDP doesn't have knowledge of the RP and vice versa. • In case of ISA failure, users can't access the RP anymore (or with complex failover mecanism) • Users must exist in the ISA database (needs provisioning) • Might be a problem for the RP to access to IDP APIs Identity Provider Relying Party ISA       Note : numbers  to  represent the order of the interactions. Note : depending on the protocol, links ,, and  may or may not go through the browser.

  15. ISA acts on behalf of the SP 3/3 • Functionalview Authentication delegation IDP Selection & Authentication delegation (acting on behalf of the real RP) IDP RP ISA RP metadata Remote RP endpoints

  16. ISA acts on behalf of the SP 3/3 • Technical view • Protocol on links  and  can be any widely spread protocol. • As an intermediary, the ISA must implement fully the chosen protocol(s) for links  and . • Single protocol between ISA and RP • Opportunity to specify a simplified SSO profile of existing specs for steps  and  • In case of ISA failure, SP can use another one or no ISA. Identity Provider Relying Party ISA       Note : numbers  to  represent the order of the interactions. Note : depending on the protocol, links ,, and  may or may not go through the browser.

  17. First achievements for Hillsboro plenary

  18. Roadmap proposal March plenary October July First draft for "metadataspecs evolution" First draft for "Technicalway to integrate the ISA" GUI and UX guidelines ISA implementationguidelines

  19. Status on IDP's metadata requirements and proposals to fulfill these requirements IDP Selection WG

  20. IDP "Display" metadata 1/3 SAML : • Sampo's proposal "Profile for Use of DisplayName" already covers the requirements : • Use of <OrganizationDisplayName> for DisplayName • Use of <OrganizationURL> for Logo Question : What is the actual status of that proposal ?

  21. IDP "Display" metadata 2/3 OpenID : • Proposal : Extension to the YADIS XRDS document. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <xrds:XRDS xmlns:xrds="xri://$xrds" xmlns="xri://$xrd*($v*2.0)"> <XRD> <Service priority="0"> <Type>http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0/signon</Type> <URI>http://www.myopenid.com/server</URI> </Service> </XRD> </xrds:XRDS> Proposal : Advertize OP's DisplayName and Logo URL part of XRDS document published by the OP ? Help needed on best way to do it with XRDS…

  22. IDP "Display" metadata 3/3 InfoCard : • N/A (either just the "InfoCard" logo or CardTile of the last used InfoCard)

  23. IDP's supported ACs and ALs 1/3 SAML : • Generic mechanism defined in "SAML Metadata Extension for Entity Attributes" and specific attribute already defined in "SAML Identity Assurance Profiles" <EntityDescriptor xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:metadata" xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion" xmlns:attr="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:metadata:attribute" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" entityID="https://IdentityProvider.example.com/SAML"> <Extensions> <attr:EntityAttributes> <saml:Attribute NameFormat="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:attrname-format:uri" Name="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:attribute:assurance-certification"> <saml:AttributeValue>http://foo.example.com/assurance/loa1</saml:AttributeValue> </saml:Attribute> </attr:EntityAttributes> </Extensions> ... </EntityDescriptor> Proposal for ACs : define a new attribute name for Authentication Context classes : urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:attribute:authn-context-class

  24. IDP's supported ACs and ALs 2/3 OpenID : • Supported Authentication policies can already be advertized in the Yadis XRDS document as specified in "OpenID Provider Authentication Policy Extension 1.0" (should also be used to advertize supported Assurance Level ?) <xrd> <Service> <Type>http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0/signon</Type> <Type>http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/...</Type> <URI>https://example.com/server</URI> </Service> </xrd> Can it be used as well to advertize the OP's Assurance Level ? (and how does it relates to the OIX Listing Service ?)

  25. IDP's supported ACs and ALs 3/3 InfoCard : • Authentication Contexts and Assurance Levels are just considered as claims. • As an example, claims for Assurance Levels have been defined by ICF : • icam-assurance-level-1 • icam-assurance-level-2 • icam-assurance-level-3

  26. IDP's supported attributes/claims 1/3 SAML : • Already defined in SAML Metadata specifications : <EntityDescriptor xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:metadata" xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" entityID="https://IdentityProvider.com/SAML"> <ds:Signature>...</ds:Signature> <IDPSSODescriptor WantAuthnRequestsSigned="true" protocolSupportEnumeration="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol"> ... <saml:Attribute NameFormat="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:attrname-format:uri" Name="urn:saml_attribute_name_1" /> <saml:Attribute NameFormat="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:attrname-format:uri" Name="urn:saml_attribute_name_2" /> ... </IDPSSODescriptor> </EntityDescriptor>

  27. IDP's supported attributes/claims 2/3 OpenID : • The Yadis XRDS document only advertizes the SREG/AX service(s) supported by the OP but not the exact list of supported attributes/claims. • Proposal : Extension to the YADIS XRDS document. <xrd> <Service> <Type>http://specs.openid.net/auth/2.0/signon</Type> <Type>http://openid.net/sreg/1.0</Type> <Type>http://openid.net/srv/ax/1.0</Type> <URI>https://example.com/server</URI> </Service> </xrd> Proposal : Explicitly advertize OP's supported attributes/claims part of XRDS document published by the OP ? Help needed on best way to do it with XRDS…

  28. IDP's supported attributes/claims 3/3 InfoCard : • Supported claims are advertized at the creation/import of the Information Card.

  29. More thoughts required… How to advertize the list of APIs an IDP/OP can provide bootstrap for ?

  30. Summary of required evolutions for IDP's metadata SAML : Adoption of Sampo's proposal for DisplayName/Logo New attribute name required to advertize supported ACs classes (already done for Assurance Levels) OpenID : Yadis XRDS document extension for both DisplayName/Logo and supported attributes/claims ? InfoCard : Generic claim mechanism already existing

  31. Technical Way to Integrate the ISA

  32. Charter Proposal for a unified WG (IDPS + ULX)

  33. Thank you

More Related