>>>>> "David" == David Chadwick <[email protected]> writes:
David> Section 1. i) Data Minimization and User Participation:
David> "There is currently no direct client participation in this
David> decision." (i.e. release of identity attributes). We should
David> say at this juncture that this is a major deficiency in
David> existing federated systems, since the user does not have full
David> consent or control over which of his identity attributes are
David> released. This should be fixed in Abfab
I do not support this change.
There are some cases where this is a major deficiency, but it's not
entirely clear whether fixing this at the ABFAB layer is the right
approach.
I'd argue that trying to fix the concent problem in a general manner at
the federation layer may have done more harm over the years than the
privacy problem that is trying to be addressed.
David> iii) I dont buy into your whiteboard example of single entity
David> authentication, because a hacked whiteboard could trick the
David> user into opening the wrong file, which could be disasterous
David> during an important business meeting. SO mutual
David> authentication is needed here as well. If you want an example
David> where mutual authentication is not important, its one where
David> either the information being accessed is of very little value
David> to the accessor so that it does not matter if it is erroneous
David> information or not, or one where it does not matter who the
David> accessor is i.e. its public information.
Most of the tools I'm familiar with for screen sharing etc would not
allow the white board to pick the presentation/file.
I'd support adding a comment that you don't want to run UI on the white
board, but no I think I completely disagree with your proposed
constraints on when this is useful.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
