This document contains DRAFT material intended for discussion and comment by the InCommon participant community. Comments and questions should be sent to the InCommon participants mailing list.
At the November TAC F2F, we discussed having a matrix of best practices by which to evaluate registered sites to help set expectations and create peer pressure. This is a preliminary set of suggested criteria.
Policy
Technical Basics
- Service Endpoints in Metadata
- X.509 Certificates in Metadata
- User Interface Elements in IdP/SP Metadata
- Requested Attributes in SP Metadata
Operational Maturity
Maximizing the Federation
- Identity Provider Attribute Release Process
- Release of attributes w/o admin involvement (via consent or otherwise)
- Strawman: It is RECOMMENDED that
eduPersonScopedAffiliation,eduPersonEntitlement, andeduPersonTargetedIDbe released across the board, to all SPs. The five (5) remaining attributes listed on the InCommon Federation Attribute Summary page SHOULD be released to all SPs provided user consent is obtained. In both cases, we're referring to all SPs in the InCommon Federation.
- Strawman: It is RECOMMENDED that
- Release of attributes w/o admin involvement (via consent or otherwise)
- Persistent Identifier Support
Parked Items
- Keys of less than a certain age
- We should consider what, if any, age is actually "too old"
- Full saml2int conformance
- InCommon Implementation Profile conformance
- Could identify "exceptions to conformance" to highlight specific missing capabilities or could break profile into separate features in the matrix
- Identity attributes
- Regular (event-driven? nightly?) synchronization with systems of record
- Documentation of locally-defined attributes
- Reporting of statistics
- Education
- For end-users
- Privacy
- Appropriate use
- Protection of secrets
- For end-users