Assurance

["Roy, Nicholas S" <>]

I've added this item to the SP use case issues section.

Best,

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: 

 
[mailto:]
 On Behalf Of Tom Scavo
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 9:59 AM
To: 

Subject: Re: [Assurance] Assurance InterOp: Update and Next Steps

Nick, there are a number of issues on the Technical Implementation wiki page 
(https://spaces.internet2.edu/x/eqSKAQ) that touch on that issue. Would you 
mind adding an issue to that page to make it explicit?

Thanks,
Tom

----- Original Message -----
> I just thought of a different use case.  I'm not certain that I know 
> where it would be used, but it seems plausible.  It's kind of similar 
> to the "prefers Silver" case, but I could see there being a need for 
> differentiation.
> 
> The use case is: Elevation of LoA.  What if a service allows everyone 
> to log in at the baseline level of assurance (0/Aluminum?) and then 
> someone needs to do something that requires elevated privileges and 
> elevated LoA.  For instance, you allow a researcher to log in to most 
> stuff using InCommon "Aluminum", but then they have a need to make 
> changes to some Grouper groups.  This might only be a problem if the 
> collaborative org handles authZ for several apps inside a container 
> that uses a federation gateway protected by an SP.
> 
> Nick
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> 
> [mailto:]
>  On Behalf Of Ann West
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 9:21 AM
> To: 
> 
> Subject: [Assurance] Assurance InterOp: Update and Next Steps
> 
> Good morning everyone,
> 
> This note is a follow up on the interop testing effort we started in 
> mid September.
> 
> As a reminder, we (thanks to Virginia Tech and the CILogon folks) have 
> tested and documented use case 0 
> (https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/InCAssurance/SP+Assurance+Policy+Use+Cases).
> During the Internet2 Member Meeting last week, Terry Fleury from 
> CILogon also tested having the SP pull the entityid qualifier out of 
> test metatdata to verify entityid certification. All good things!
> 
> Next Steps
> In lieu of having a call this week (which was the original plan), we 
> talked in the InCommon Technical Advisory Committee meeting last week 
> about the following next steps:
> 
> - Ann will work with the SPs intending to offer Silver services in
> 2012 to determine their initial functional use cases. (See documented 
> examples at the above URL.) As a reminder, the identified services 
> are: NIH ERA (grant submission), CILogon (Open Science Grid access), 
> selected LIGO services (such as updating access groupers in their 
> Grouper instance), and National Student Clearinghouse/Meteor access 
> (financial aid).
> 
> - Next, the TAC will review the SP's use cases to determine what's 
> needed for the technical support.
> 
> - After that, we'll loop 'round with the community for further 
> testing.
> 
> So far, the use case we've already tested (UC0) will work for the SPs 
> I've contacted, but stay tuned for additional flows and testing 
> updates.
> 
> Many thanks for your help. If you have suggestions, alternatives, 
> ideas, etc. please don't hesitate to let me know.
> 
> Best,
> Ann
> 
> --
> Ann West
> Assistant Director,
> Assurance and Community
> Internet2/InCommon/Michigan Tech
> 
> office: +1.906.487.1726
> 
>