RE: AuthN and Credentials

I believe that these scenarios are the basis of the requirement:

[R-Anonymity] SAML will allow assertions to be made about anonymous
principals, where "anonymous" means that an assertion about a principal does
not include an attribute uniquely identifying the principal (ex: user name,
distinguished name, etc.).

Regards,

Darren



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pilz, Gilbert [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 4:00 AM
> To: UseCaseList
> Subject: RE: AuthN and Credentials
>
>
> Marlena said
>
> >     Another (and to my mind, important!) variation, is an
> asserting party
> > making statements about the presenter of a token *without* mention of a
> > principal identity.
> >       This might look as follows.
> >
> >     "I am an employee of Outlook Technologies, Inc, and
> >      I play the role of 'Software Architect', and
> >      I am a member of the group 'San Francisco Office"
> >
> >   This ability -- to have authorization attributes associated with a
> > requestor without the requestor's principal identity being
> > revealed -- is one of the key "use cases" in Shibboleth.
> >
> >     I am very interested in seeing this type of assertion as part
> > of SAML  It is definitely necessary for Shibboleth, but I believe
> > it  will be useful outside the strict Shibboleth space as well.
>
> I just wanted to voice my support of this position. In the
> interest of "risk
> minimization" why expose authentication information (the principal's
> identity) when all that the receiving party is really interested in is the
> authorization attributes ?
>
> --
>
>