Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

assurance - RE: [Assurance] comments on draft MFA Interop WG documents

Subject: Assurance

List archive

RE: [Assurance] comments on draft MFA Interop WG documents


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Cantor, Scott" <>
  • To: "" <>
  • Subject: RE: [Assurance] comments on draft MFA Interop WG documents
  • Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 14:46:02 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Authentication-results: spf=pass (sender IP is 164.107.81.210) smtp.mailfrom=osu.edu; incommon.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;incommon.org; dmarc=bestguesspass action=none header.from=osu.edu;
  • Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
  • Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
> >Would a formal institutional declaration of compliance with the MFA
> >profile cause you to trust its MFA assertions more?
>
> Yes.

Can I ask why? What's the difference between self-asserting a category and
self-asserting the same data in an assertion?

-- Scott



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page