OK how
about
SomethingCarried
and we
can also add in for completeness
SomethingYouAre :-)
I
dislike 2 factor since it might only be one of the factors.
-----Original Message-----
From: Philpott, Robert
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002
10:37 PM
To: oasis sstc
()
Subject: RE:
[security-services] New authentication method for One-Time Pa
ssword?
> I think that the
Password auth method may be considered to cover this at the
least.
Hi Phill -
Unfortunately, we really need something distinct from password since we have
some applications that MUST know whether a user authenticated with a single
factor (e.g. LDAP password) or a 2-factor (e.g. SecurID token) authn
method.
As I said, if folks
object to a proprietary method (SECURID), I can live with something that at
least indicates it was a 2-factor authentication. Recommendations?
"TOKEN" - too
generic? does not necessarily indicate 2-factor strength?
"2FACTOR" - perhaps
this is the better choice
"OTP" - I don't
think we should use this one since there's an RFC by this name that's
specific to onlky one of several OTP methods
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, April 04,
2002 9:27
PM
To: Philpott, Robert; oasis sstc
()
Subject: RE: [security-services] New
authentication method for One-Time Pa ssword?
I think
that the Password auth method may be considered to cover this at the
least.
If more
specificity is required I would suggest that the method merely specify a
hardware token rather than any particular proprietary means of achieving that
(unless we want to spend more time with lawyers).
If an
application cares about the vendor of the token let the vendor specify the uri
out of their oid arc :-)
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Philpott, Robert [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, April
04, 2002 6:31
PM
To: oasis sstc
()
Subject: [security-services] New
authentication method for One-Time Password?
I hesitate bringing this up so
late, but a) we did just add an authn method for SRP, and b) our SAML
implementation really needs an authn method defined for RSA SecurID
time-based token authentication. Would you please consider adding the
following authn method to the core spec?
7.1.?? RSA
SecurID
URI:
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:SECURID
The
authentication was performed using an RSA Security time-based SecurID
token.
I
considered referring to IETF "rfc2808 - The SecurID® SASL Mechanism", which
does describe the method, but in the context of SASL. I decided a
specific SAML domain qualifier made more sense.
If you would prefer, we could
live with a generalization of the method type as "Time-Based Token" (TBT?
TOKEN?)
Since
SecurID is also a form of One-Time Password, of which there are many other
types, I also considered following the model we used for X509, where we
would have:
7.1.?? One-Time
Password
URI:
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:OTP
The
authentication was performed by some (unspecified) mechanism using a
One-Time Password. It may have been one of the mechanisms for which a more
specific identifier has been defined below.
7.1.?? RSA
SecurID
URI:
urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:SECURID
The
authentication was performed using an RSA Security time-based SecurID
token.
Etc.
But then
I discovered that IETF rfc2289 defines a specific OTP method based on
S/Key. So, it didn't make sense to me to have the SAML-defined OTP
which might get confused with the rfc2289 method.
If we don't add this to the core
spec, our implementation will have to define one for our own use. But
SecurID is a VERY widely used time-based token (2-factor) authentication
method, so I'd prefer having the SECURID method defined. As I said,
I'd also settle for the TBT/TOKEN method.
Comments?
Rob
Philpott
RSA
Security Inc.
The
Most Trusted Name in e-Security
Tel:
781-515-7115
Mobile:
617-510-0893
Fax:
781-515-7020
mailto:
