Re: [zcap-spec] Request for Clarification (Is it "what" or "why?" and cross-matching)

On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 8:36 AM David Chadwick <
david.chadwick@crosswordcybersecurity.com> wrote:

> Thanks Alan.
>
> I am familiar with the authz decision statement, which was discontinued in
> later versions of SAML in favour of XACML
>
We found XACML to be an excellent policy description language for defining
which authorizations to give to whom.  It is much richer than needed for
the kind of authorizations we anticipated.

--------------
Alan Karp


On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 8:36 AM David Chadwick <
david.chadwick@crosswordcybersecurity.com> wrote:

> Thanks Alan.
>
> I am familiar with the authz decision statement, which was discontinued in
> later versions of SAML in favour of XACML
>
> Kind regards
>
> David
> On 14/03/2023 15:19, Alan Karp wrote:
>
> On 13/03/2023 20:42, Alan Karp wrote:
>
> When we did our Zebra Copy work, which used SAML 1.1 certificates as
> capabilities,
>
> very interesting. Which type of SAML statement did you use?
>
>
> Authorization decision statement.  See
> https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1314418.1314421.  That's behind a paywall
> but hpl.hp.com/techreports/2007/HPL-2007-105.html isn't.  (Don't worry
> about the length.  Only the first 16 pages are worth reading.)
>
> --------------
> Alan Karp
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 1:10 AM David Chadwick <
> d.w.chadwick@truetrust.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 13/03/2023 20:42, Alan Karp wrote:
>>
>> When we did our Zebra Copy work, which used SAML 1.1 certificates as
>> capabilities,
>>
>> very interesting. Which type of SAML statement did you use?
>>
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 March 2023 16:27:24 UTC