David Waite
David Waite
I would. I had been working on support for [RFC 6265](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6265), which got involved enough to push for some components to be rewritten. But that work obviously stalled.
Several realizations of credentials (e.g. leveraging anonymizing techniques like link secrets) will often only have a way for a single subject to prove knowledge/possession. The non-normative example of a "bearer"...
The reality is that there are several decisions (including those as part of privacy considerations) which will prevent a full fidelity expression of the data model being exchanged between parties....
> But, bringing it to the attention of Authenticator manufacturers in the FIDO-DEV forum might be worthwhile as the FIDO Alliance could also initiate such an effort outside the purview...
Yes, what I was thinking was something similar to this: 1. best-effort cleanup of credentials the site does not understand 2. eliminating edge cases that create spurious credentials when possible....
@cyberphone There is a technology preview by Apple which uses a secret/private key synchronization mechanism to synchronize PublicKeyCredentials (including private key) across devices. A single registered credential could be used...
@rmondello my understanding is that there is a caveat however: the supported API for keychain (e.g [kSecAttrSynchronizable](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/ksecattrsynchronizable)) and the Apple Platform Security guide have not yet been updated to reflect...
@certainlyNotHeisenberg I believe it is meant to be two-factor (possession and knowledge based) for circle membership, hence the unhighlighted part of the two signatures in this particular step. I'll let...
> I have had other SaaS start to complain about this Ping etc. Correct. We had no expectation that this WebKit-only behavior would expand from platform authenticators to all authenticators....
> > ...(I'm also inclined to rename it, say, "cntx"). [...] Though, one could also argue that "scope" better reflects the connotations here: > > I think `ctx` is a...