-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open Issue 18: assurance level #55
Labels
Open-Issue
Issues related to open-issues in published specification.
Comments
did not receive any comments on this. Unclear it needs to remain an open issue, but is not a problem to be an open issue. |
leave as an open issue to allow for commenters to provide input to this specific extension. |
JohnMoehrke
added
Open-Issue
Issues related to open-issues in published specification.
and removed
discussion
needing committee discussion
labels
Apr 27, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is the use of AssuranceLevel proper? Should the extension element be defined more specific to NIST-800-63 assurance levels, and not allow to be carrying historical vocabulary that is not specifically assurance-level but rather the method of authentication used (e.g. urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport)?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: