atom feed28 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.security-servicesRE: [security-services] Re: ForceAuth...
FromSent OnAttachments
Beach, Michael COct 23, 2003 12:49 pm.bin, .doc
John KempNov 24, 2003 1:58 pm 
Beach, Michael CNov 25, 2003 11:24 am 
Greg WhiteheadNov 25, 2003 11:50 am 
Beach, Michael CNov 25, 2003 12:24 pm 
Greg WhiteheadNov 25, 2003 12:32 pm 
John KempNov 26, 2003 6:20 am 
Scott CantorNov 26, 2003 8:22 am 
John KempNov 27, 2003 7:49 am 
Scott CantorNov 28, 2003 9:30 pm 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 2:14 am 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 2:25 am 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 2:27 am 
John KempNov 29, 2003 5:54 am 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 11:35 am 
Beach, Michael CNov 29, 2003 11:37 am 
John KempNov 29, 2003 11:52 am 
Beach, Michael CNov 29, 2003 11:59 am 
Beach, Michael CNov 29, 2003 12:03 pm 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 1:46 pm 
Conor P. CahillNov 29, 2003 2:59 pm 
Anthony NadalinNov 30, 2003 5:23 pm 
Conor P. CahillNov 30, 2003 7:18 pm 
Conor P. CahillDec 1, 2003 4:16 am 
Anthony NadalinDec 1, 2003 9:31 pm 
Conor P. CahillDec 2, 2003 4:38 am 
Anthony NadalinDec 3, 2003 4:36 am 
Conor P. CahillDec 3, 2003 4:54 am 
Subject:RE: [security-services] Re: ForceAuthn (was Use Cases)
From:Beach, Michael C (mich@boeing.com)
Date:Nov 29, 2003 11:37:54 am
List:org.oasis-open.lists.security-services

JohnK said:

I guess the ultimate question though is whether we think that ForceAuthn semantics that allow a situation where the *user* is not challenged are sufficient for the SP, and if not, is this a problem?

------------------------------------------------- Mike Beach says: