GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc7642

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. LI, Ed. Request for Comments: 7642 Alibaba Group Category: Informational P. Hunt ISSN: 2070-1721 Oracle

                                                         B. Khasnabish
                                                         ZTE (TX) Inc.
                                                            A. Nadalin
                                                             Microsoft
                                                            Z. Zeltsan
                                                            Individual
                                                        September 2015
            System for Cross-domain Identity Management:
         Definitions, Overview, Concepts, and Requirements

Abstract

 This document provides definitions and an overview of the System for
 Cross-domain Identity Management (SCIM).  It lays out the system's
 concepts, models, and flows, and it includes user scenarios, use
 cases, and requirements.

Status of This Memo

 This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
 published for informational purposes.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
 approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
 Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7642.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 1] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
 document authors.  All rights reserved.
 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
 publication of this document.  Please review these documents
 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
 to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
 described in the Simplified BSD License.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 2] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
 2.  SCIM User Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.1.  Background and Context  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.2.  Model Concepts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.2.1.  Triggers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.2.2.  Actors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.3.  Modes and Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     2.2.4.  Bulk and Batch Operational Semantics  . . . . . . . .   8
   2.3.  Flows from Cloud Service Provider to Cloud Service
         Provider (CSP->CSP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     2.3.1.  CSP->CSP: Create Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .   8
     2.3.2.  CSP->CSP: Update Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.3.  CSP->CSP: Delete Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.4.  CSP->CSP: SSO Trigger (Push)  . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.5.  CSP->CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.3.6.  CSP->CSP: Password Reset (Push) . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   2.4.  Flows from Enterprise Cloud Subscriber to Cloud Service
         Provider    (ECS->CSP)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.4.1.  ECS->CSP: Create Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.4.2.  ECS->CSP: Update Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.4.3.  ECS->CSP: Delete Identity (Push)  . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.4.4.  ECS->CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)  . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
 3.  SCIM Use Cases  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   3.1.  Migration of the Identities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   3.2.  Single Sign-On (SSO) Service  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   3.3.  Provisioning of the User Accounts for a Community of
         Interest (COI)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   3.4.  Transfer of Attributes to a Relying Party's Website . . .  15
   3.5.  Change Notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
 4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
 5.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   5.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   5.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
 Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19

LI, et al. Informational [Page 3] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

1. Introduction

 This document provides the SCIM definitions, overview, concepts,
 flows, scenarios, and use cases.  It also provides a list of the
 requirements derived from the use cases.
 The document's objective is to help with understanding of the design
 and applicability of the SCIM schema [RFC7643] and SCIM protocol
 [RFC7644].
 Unlike the practice of some protocols like Application Bridging for
 Federated Access Beyond web (ABFAB) and SAML2 WebSSO, SCIM provides
 provisioning and de-provisioning of resources in a separate context
 from authentication (aka just-in-time provisioning).

1.1. Terminology

 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] when they
 appear in ALL CAPS.  These words may also appear in this document in
 lowercase as plain English words, absent their normative meanings.
 Here is a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in this document:
 o  COI: Community of Interest
 o  CRM: Customer Relationship Management
 o  CRUD: Create, Read, Update, Delete
 o  CSP: Cloud Service Provider
 o  CSU: Cloud Service User
 o  ECS: Enterprise Cloud Subscriber
 o  IaaS: Infrastructure as a Service
 o  JIT: Just In Time
 o  PaaS: Platform as a Service
 o  SaaS: Software as a Service
 o  SAML: Security Assertion Markup Language

LI, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 o  SCIM: System for Cross-domain Identity Management
 o  SSO: Single Sign-On

2. SCIM User Scenarios

2.1. Background and Context

 The System for Cross-domain Identity Management (SCIM) specification
 is designed to manage user identity in cloud-based applications and
 services in a standardized way to enable interoperability, security,
 and scalability.  The specification suite seeks to build upon
 experience with existing schemas and deployments, placing specific
 emphasis on simplicity of development and integration, while applying
 existing authentication, authorization, and privacy models.  The
 intent of the SCIM specification is to reduce the cost and complexity
 of user management operations by providing a common user schema and
 extension model, as well as binding documents to provide patterns for
 exchanging this schema using standard protocols.  In essence, make it
 fast, cheap, and easy to move users in to, out of, and around the
 cloud.
 The SCIM scenarios are overviews of user stories designed to help
 clarify the intended scope of the SCIM effort.

2.2. Model Concepts

2.2.1. Triggers

 Quite simply, triggers are actions or activities that start SCIM
 flows.  Triggers may not be relevant at the protocol level or the
 schema level; they really serve to help identify the type or activity
 that resulted in a SCIM protocol exchange.  Triggers make use of the
 traditional provisioning CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete)
 operations but add additional use-case contexts like SSO (Single-Sign
 On) as it is designed to capture a class of use case that makes sense
 to the actor requesting it rather than to describe a protocol
 operation.
 o  Create SCIM Identity Resource - Service On-boarding Trigger: A
    "create SCIM identity resource" trigger is a service on-boarding
    activity in which a business action such as a new hire or new
    service subscription is initiated by one of the SCIM Actors.  In
    the protocol itself, service on-boarding may well be implemented
    via the same resource PUT method as a service change.  This is
    particular to the implementation, and not to the use cases that
    drive that implementation.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 5] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 o  Update SCIM Identity Resource - Service Change Trigger: An "update
    SCIM identity resource" trigger is a service change activity as a
    result of an identity moving or changing its service level.  An
    "update SCIM identity" trigger might be the result of a change in
    a service subscription level or a change to key identity data used
    to denote a service subscription level.  Password changes are
    specifically called out from other more general identity attribute
    changes as they are considered to have specific use-case
    differences.
 o  Delete SCIM Identity Resource - Service Termination Trigger: A
    "delete SCIM identity resource" trigger represents a specific and
    deliberate action to remove an identity from a given SCIM service
    point.  At this stage, it is unclear if the SCIM protocol needs to
    identify a separate protocol exchange for service suspension
    actions.  This may be relevant as target services usually
    differentiate between these results and thus may require separate
    resource representations.
 o  Single Sign-On (SSO) Trigger - Service Access Request: A "Single
    Sign-On" trigger is a special class of activity in which a Create
    or Update trigger is initiated during an SSO operational flow.
    The implication here is that, as the result of a service access
    request by the end user (SSO), defined SCIM protocol exchanges can
    be used to initiate SCIM resource CRUD operations somewhere in the
    service cloud.

2.2.2. Actors

 Actors are the operating parties that take part in both sides of a
 SCIM protocol exchange and help identify the source of a given
 Trigger.  So far, we have identified the following SCIM Actors:
 o  Cloud Service Provider (CSP): A CSP is the entity operating a
    given cloud service.  In a SaaS scenario, this is simply the
    application provider.  In an IaaS or PaaS scenario, the CSP may be
    the underlying IaaS/PaaS infrastructure provider or the owner of
    the application running on that platform.  In all cases, the CSP
    is the thing that holds the identity information being operated
    upon.  Put another way, the CSP really is the service that the end
    user interacts with.
 o  Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS): An ECS represents a middle tier
    of aggregation for related identity records.  In one of our sample
    enterprise SaaS scenarios, the ECS is "Example.com" that
    subscribes to a cloud-based CRM service "SaaS-CRM Inc." (the CSP)
    for all of its sales staff.  The actual Cloud Service Users (CSUs)
    are the FooBar Inc. sales staff.  The ECS Actor is identified to

LI, et al. Informational [Page 6] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

    help capture use cases in which a single entity is given
    administrative responsibility for other identity accounts.  SCIM
    may not address the configuration and setup of an ECS within the
    CSP, but it does address use cases in which SCIM identity
    resources are grouped together and administered as part of some
    broader agreement or operational exchange.
 o  Cloud Service User (CSU): A CSU represents the real cloud service
    end user -- i.e., the person logging into and using the cloud
    service.  As described above, and ECS will typically own or manage
    multiple CSU identities, whereas the CSU represents the FooBar
    Inc. employee using the cloud service to manage their CRM process.
                         +---------------------+
                         |   Cloud Service     |
                         |   Provider (CSP)    |
                         +---------------------+
                                    |
                  +--------------------------------+
                  |                                |
                  v                                v
          +----------------+              +----------------+
          |Enterprise Cloud|              |Enterprise Cloud|
          |Subscriber (ECS)|              |Subscriber (ECS)|
          +----------------+              +----------------+
                  |                                |
          +----------------+              +----------------+
          |                |              |                |
          v                v              v                v
  +-------------+ +-------------+   +-------------+ +-------------+
  |Cloud Service| |Cloud Service|   |Cloud Service| |Cloud Service|
  |  User (CSU) | |  User (CSU) |   |  User (CSU) | |  User (CSU) |
  +-------------+ +-------------+   +-------------+ +-------------+
                         Figure 1: SCIM Actors

2.2.3. Modes and Flows

 Modes identify the functional intent of a data flow initiated in a
 SCIM scenario.  The modes identified so far are 'Push' and 'Pull'
 referring to pushing data to and pulling data from an authoritative
 identity data store.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 7] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 In the SCIM scenarios, modes are often used in the context of a flow
 between two Actors.  For example, one might refer to a Cloud-to-Cloud
 Pull exchange.  Here one Cloud Service Provider (CSP) is pulling
 identity information from another CSP.  Commonly referenced flows
 are:
 o  Cloud Service Provider to Cloud Service Provider (CSP->CSP)
 o  Enterprise Cloud Subscriber to Cloud Service Provider (ECS->CSP)
 Modes and flows simply help us understand what is taking place; they
 are likely to be technically meaningless at the protocol level, but
 they help the reader follow the SCIM scenarios and apply them to
 real-world use cases.

2.2.4. Bulk and Batch Operational Semantics

 It is assumed that each of the trigger actions outlined in this
 document may be part of the larger bulk or batch operation.
 Individual SCIM actions should be able to be collected together to
 create single protocol exchanges.
 The initial focus of SCIM scenarios is on identifying base flows and
 single operations.  The specific complexity of full bulk and batch
 operations is left to a later version of the scenarios or to the main
 specification.

2.3. Flows from Cloud Service Provider to Cloud Service Provider

    (CSP->CSP)
 These scenarios represent flows between two Cloud Service Providers
 (CSPs).  It is assumed that each CSP maintains an Identity Data Store
 for its Cloud Service Users (CSUs).  These scenarios address various
 joiner, mover, leaver, and JIT triggers, resulting in push and pull
 data exchanges between the CSPs.

2.3.1. CSP→CSP: Create Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  CSP-1 receives a Create Identity trigger action from
 its Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1).  CSP-1 creates a local user
 account for the new CSU.  CSP-1 then pushes the new CSU joiner push
 request downstream to CSU-2 and gets confirmation that the account
 was successfully created.  After receiving the confirmation from CSP-
 2, CSP-1 sends an acknowledgment to the requesting ECS.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 8] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

2.3.2. CSP→CSP: Update Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  The Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1) has already
 created an account with CSP-1 and supplied a critical attribute
 "department" that is used by CSP-1 to drive service options.  CSP-1
 then receives an Update Identity trigger action from its Enterprise
 Cloud Subscriber (ECS).  CSP-1 updates its local directory account
 with the new department value.  CSP-1 then initiates a separate SCIM
 protocol exchange to push the mover change request downstream to CSP-
 2.  After receiving the confirmation from CSP-2, CSP-1 sends an
 acknowledgment to ECS-1.

2.3.3. CSP→CSP: Delete Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  CSP-1 receives a Delete Identity trigger action from
 its Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1).  CSP-1 suspends the local
 directory account for the specified CSU account.  CSP-1 then pushes a
 termination request for the specified CSU account downstream to CSP-2
 and gets confirmation that the account was successfully removed.
 After receiving the confirmation from CSP-2, CSP-1 finalizes the
 deletion operation and sends an acknowledgment to the requesting ECS.
 This use case highlights how different CSPs may implement different
 operational semantics behind the same SCIM operation.  Note CSP-1
 suspends the account representation for its service, whereas CPS-2
 implements a true delete operation.

2.3.4. CSP→CSP: SSO Trigger (Push)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  However, rather than pre-provisioning accounts from
 CSP-1 to CSP-2, CSP-1 waits for a service access request from the end
 Cloud Service User (CSU-1) before issuing account creation details to
 CSP-2.  When the CSU completes a SSO transaction from CSP-1 to CSP-2,
 CSP-2 then creates an account for the CSU based on information pushed
 to it from CSP-1.
 At the protocol level, this class of scenarios may result in the use
 of common protocol exchange patterns between CSP-1 and CSP-2.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 9] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

2.3.5. CSP→CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  However, rather than pre-provisioning accounts from
 CSP-1 to CSP-2, CSP-2 waits for a service access request from the
 Cloud Service User (CSU-1) before initiating a Pull request to gather
 information about the CSU sufficient to create a local account.
 At the protocol level, this class of scenarios may result in the use
 of common protocol exchange patterns between CSP-2 and CSP-1.

2.3.6. CSP→CSP: Password Reset (Push)

 In this scenario, two CSPs (CSP-1 and CSP-2) have a shared service
 agreement in place that requires the exchange of Cloud Service User
 (CSU) accounts.  CSP-1 wants to change the password for a specific
 Cloud Service User (CSU-1).  CSP-1 sends a request to CSP-2 to reset
 the password value for CSU-1.
 At the protocol level, this scenario may result in the same protocol
 exchange as any other attribute change request.

2.4. Flows from Enterprise Cloud Subscriber to Cloud Service Provider

    (ECS->CSP)
 These scenarios represent flows between an Enterprise Cloud
 Subscriber (ECS) and a Cloud Service Providers (CSP).  It is assumed
 that the ECS and the CSP each maintain an information access service
 for the relevant Cloud Service Users (CSUs).  These scenarios address
 various joiner, mover, leaver, and JIT triggers, resulting in push
 and pull data exchanges between the ECS and the CSP.
 Many of these scenarios are very similar to those defined in
 Section 2.3.  They are identified separately here so that we may
 explore any differences that might emerge.

2.4.1. ECS→CSP: Create Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, an Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1) maintains a
 service with a Cloud Service Provider (CSP-1) that requires the
 sharing of various Cloud Service User (CSU) accounts.  A new user
 joins ECS-1 and so ECS-1 pushes an account creation request to CSP-1,
 supplying all required attribute values for the base SCIM schema and
 additional values for the extended SCIM schema as required.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 10] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

2.4.2. ECS→CSP: Update Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, an Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1) maintains a
 service with Cloud Service Provider (CSP-1) that drives service
 definition from a key account schema attribute called Department.
 ECS-1 wishes to move a given CSU from Department A to Department B
 and so it pushes an attribute update request to the CSP.

2.4.3. ECS→CSP: Delete Identity (Push)

 In this scenario, an Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1) maintains a
 service with a Cloud Service Provider (CSP-1).  Upon termination of
 one of its employee's employment agreement, ECS-1 sends a suspend
 account request to CSP-1.  One week later, the ECS wishes to complete
 the process by fully removing the Cloud Service User (CSU) account,
 so it sends a terminate account request to CSP-1.

2.4.4. ECS→CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)

 In this scenario, an Enterprise Cloud Subscriber (ECS-1) maintains a
 service with a Cloud Service Provider (CSP-1).  No accounts are
 created or exchanged in advance.  However, rather than pre-
 provisioning accounts from ECS-1 to CSP-1, CSP-1 waits for a service
 access request from the Cloud Service User (CSU-1) under the control
 domain of ECS-1, before issuing an account Pull request to ECS-1.

3. SCIM Use Cases

 This section lists the SCIM use cases.

3.1. Migration of the Identities

 Description:
 A company SomeEnterprise runs an application ManageThem that relies
 on the identity information about its employees (e.g., identifiers,
 attributes).  The identity information is stored at the cloud
 provided by SomeCSP.  SomeEnterprise has decided to move identity
 information to the cloud of a different provider -- AnotherCSP.  In
 addition, SomeEnterprise has purchased a second application
 ManageThemMore, which also relies on the identity information.
 SomeEnterprise is able to move identity information to AnotherCSP
 without changing the format of identity information.  The application
 ManageThemMore is able to use the identity information.
 Pre-conditions:
 o  SomeCSP is a cloud service provider for SomeEnterprise.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 11] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 o  SomeCSP has a known attribute name and value for the Enterprise
    used for managing and transferring data.
 o  AnotherCSP is a new cloud service provider for SomeEnterprise.
 o  All involved cloud service providers and applications support the
    same standard specifying the format for and actions on the user
    (e.g., employee) identity information.
 Post-conditions:
 o  SomeEnterprise has moved its employees' identity information from
    SomeCSP to AnotherCSP without making any changes to representation
    of identity information.
 o  Application ManageThemMore is able to use the identity
    information.
 Requirements:
 o  SomeEnterprise, the applications ManageThem and ManageThemMore,
    and the providers SomeCSP and AnotherCSP support a common standard
    for identity information, which specifies the following:
  • Format (or schema) for representing user identity information
  • Interfaces and protocol for managing user identity information
 o  Cloud providers shall be able to meet regulatory requirements when
    migrating identity information between jurisdictional regions
    (e.g., countries and states may have differing regulations on
    privacy).
 o  Cloud providers shall be able to log all actions related to
    SomeEnterprise employees' identities.
 o  The logs should be secure and available for auditing.

3.2. Single Sign-On (SSO) Service

 Description:
 Bob has an account in an application hosted by a cloud service
 provider SomeCSP.  SomeCSP has federated its user identities with a
 cloud service provider AnotherCSP.  Bob requests a service from an
 application running on AnotherCSP.  The application running on
 AnotherCSP, relying on Bob's authentication by SomeCSP and using
 identity information provided by SomeCSP, serves Bob's request.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 12] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 Pre-conditions:
 o  Bob's identity information is stored on SomeCSP.
 o  SomeCSP and AnotherCSP have established trust and federated their
    user identities.
 o  SomeCSP is able to authenticate Bob.
 o  SomeCSP is able to securely provide the authentication results to
    AnotherCSP.
 o  SomeCSP is able to securely provide Bob's identity information
    (e.g., attributes) to AnotherCSP.
 o  AnotherCSP is able to verify information provided by SomeCSP.
 o  SomeCSP is able to process the identity information received from
    AnotherCSP.
 Post-conditions:
 Bob has received the requested service from an application running on
 AnotherCSP without having to authenticate to that application
 explicitly.
 Requirements:
 o  Bob must have an account with SomeCSP.
 o  SomeCSP and AnotherCSP must establish trust and federate their
    user identities.
 o  SomeCSP must be able to authenticate Bob.
 o  SomeCSP must be able to securely provide the authentication
    results to AnotherCSP.
 o  SomeCSP must be able to securely provide Bob's identity
    information (e.g., attributes) to AnotherCSP.
 o  AnotherCSP must be able to verify the identity information
    provided by SomeCSP.
 o  SomeCSP must be able to process the identity information received
    from AnotherCSP.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 13] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 o  SomeCSP and AnotherCSP must log information generated by Bob's
    actions according to their policies and the trust agreement
    between them.

3.3. Provisioning of the User Accounts for a Community of Interest

    (COI)
 Description:
 Organization YourHR provides Human Resources (HR) services to a
 Community of Interest (COI) YourCOI.  The HR services are offered as
 Software as a Service (SaaS) on public and private clouds.  YourCOI's
 offices are located all over the world.  Their Information Technology
 (IT) systems may be composed of combinations of the applications
 running on private and public clouds along with traditional IT
 systems.  The local YourCOI offices are responsible for collecting
 personal information (i.e., user identities and attributes).  YourHR
 services provide means for provisioning and distributing the employee
 identity information across all YourCOI offices.  YourHR also enables
 individual users (e.g., employees) to manage personal information
 that they are responsible for (e.g., update of an address or a
 telephone number).
 Pre-conditions:
 o  YourCOI has a complex infrastructure composed of a large number of
    local offices that rely on diverse IT systems.
 o  YourCOI has contracted YourHR to provide the HR services.
 o  Each local office has a right to establish a personal account for
    an employee.
 Post-conditions:
 o  All personal accounts are globally available to any authorized
    user or application across the YourCOI system through the services
    provided by YourHR.
 o  The employees have the ability to manage the part of personal
    information that is their responsibility.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 14] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 Requirements:
 o  YourHR must ensure that the local offices generate information
    that is provisioned securely and consider privacy requirements in
    a timely fashion across systems that may span technical (e.g.,
    protocols and applications), administrative (e.g., corporate),
    regulatory (e.g., location), and jurisdictional domains.
 o  Management of personal information must be protected against
    unauthorized access and eavesdropping, and it should be
    distributed only to authorized parties and services.
 o  Regulatory requirements shall be met when migrating identity
    information between jurisdictional regions (e.g., countries and
    states may have differing regulations on privacy).
 o  All operations with identity data must be securely logged.
 o  The logs should be available for auditing.

3.4. Transfer of Attributes to a Relying Party's Website

 Description:
 An end user has an account in a directory service A with one or more
 attributes.  That user then visits the website of relying party B,
 and the website requires attributes of the user.  The user selects
 some attributes and authorizes the transfer of data via authorization
 protocols (e.g., OAuth, SAML), so selected attributes of the user are
 transferred from the user's account in directory service A to the
 website of replying party B at the time of the user's first visit to
 that site.
 Pre-conditions:
 o  User has an account in directory service A.
 o  User has one or more attributes.
 o  User visits website of relying party B.
 Post-conditions:
 Selected attributes of the user are transferred from the user's
 account in directory service A to the website of relying party B at
 the time of the user's first visit to that site.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 15] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 Requirements:
 o  Relying party B must be able to authenticate the end user.
 o  Relying party B must be able to securely provide the
    authentication results to directory service A.
 o  Directory service A must be able to securely provide end user's
    identity information (e.g., attributes) to relying party B.
 o  Regulatory requirements shall be met when migrating identity
    information between jurisdictional regions (e.g., countries and
    states may have differing regulations on privacy).
 o  Relying parties have to be aware of changes to their cached copy,
    as these would potentially cause a state change in other relying
    parties.
 o  A maximum period should be set for the relying party to cache the
    information.

3.5. Change Notification

 Description:
 An end user has an account in a directory service A with one or more
 attributes.  That user then visits the web site of relying party B.
 The website of relying party B queries directory service A for
 attributes associated with that user, and related resources.
 The attributes of the user change later in directory service A.  For
 example, the attributes might change if the user changes their name,
 has their account disabled, or terminates their relationship with
 directory service A.  Furthermore, other resources and their
 attributes might also change.  The directory service A then wishes to
 notify the website of relying party B of these changes, as relying
 party B might (or might not) have a cache of those attributes, and if
 relying party B were aware of these changes to their cached copy, it
 would potentially cause a state change in relying party B.
 The volume of changes, however, might be substantial, and only some
 of the changes may be of interest to relying party B, so directory
 service A does not wish to "push" all the changes to B.  Instead,
 directory service A wishes to notify B that there are changes
 potentially of interest, such that B can at an appropriate time
 subsequently contact directory service A and retrieve just the subset
 of changes of interest to B.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 16] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 Note that the user must authorize directory service A to transfer
 data to the website, and the user must authorize directory service A
 to notify the website.
 Pre-conditions:
 o  User has an account in directory service A.
 o  User has one or more attributes.
 o  User visits the website of relying party B.
 o  The resource being updated is at the website.
 Post-conditions:
 Directory service A is able to notify relying party B that there are
 changes potentially of interest.
 Requirements:
 o  Relying party B must be able to authenticate the end user.
 o  Relying party B must be able to securely provide the
    authentication results to directory service A.
 o  Directory service A must be able to securely provide end user's
    changed identity information (e.g., attributes) to relying party
    B.
 o  Relying party B must be able at an appropriate time to
    subsequently contact directory service A and retrieve just the
    subset of changes of interest to relying party B.

4. Security Considerations

 Authentication and authorization must be guaranteed for the SCIM
 operations to ensure that only authenticated entities can perform the
 SCIM requests and the requested SCIM operations are authorized.
 SCIM resources (e.g., Users and Groups) can contain sensitive
 information.  Thus, data confidentiality MUST be guaranteed at the
 transport layer.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 17] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

 There can be privacy issues that go beyond transport security, e.g.,
 moving personally identifying information (PII) offshore between
 CSPs.  Regulatory requirements shall be met when migrating identity
 information between jurisdictional regions (e.g., countries and
 states may have differing regulations on privacy).
 Additionally, privacy-sensitive data elements may be omitted or
 obscured in SCIM transactions or stored records to protect these data
 elements for a user.  For instance, a role-based identifier might be
 used in place of an individual's name.
 Detailed security considerations are specified in Section 7 of the
 SCIM protocol [RFC7644] and Section 9 of the SCIM schema [RFC7643].

5. References

5.1. Normative References

 [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
            Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

5.2. Informative References

 [RFC7643]  Hunt, P., Ed., Grizzle, K., Wahlstroem, E., and
            C. Mortimore, "System for Cross-domain Identity
            Management: Core Schema", RFC 7643, DOI 10.17487/RFC7643,
            September 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7643>.
 [RFC7644]  Hunt, P., Ed., Grizzle, K., Ansari, M., Wahlstroem, E.,
            and C. Mortimore, "System for Cross-domain Identity
            Management: Protocol", RFC 7644, DOI 10.17487/RFC7644,
            September 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7644>.

Acknowledgments

 The authors would like to thank Ray Counterman, Richard Fiekowsky,
 Bert Greevenbosch, Barry Leiba, Kelly Grizzle, Magnus Nystrom,
 Stephen Farrell, Kathleen Moriarty, Benoit Claise, Dapeng Liu, and
 Jun Li for their reviews and comments.
 Also, thanks to Darran Rolls and Patrick Harding; Section 2 ("SCIM
 User Scenarios") is taken from them.

LI, et al. Informational [Page 18] RFC 7642 SCIM Requirements September 2015

Authors' Addresses

 Kepeng LI (editor)
 Alibaba Group
 969 Wenyixi Road, Yuhang District
 Hangzhou, Zhejiang  311121
 China
 Email: kepeng.lkp@alibaba-inc.com
 Phil Hunt
 Oracle
 Email: phil.hunt@oracle.com
 Bhumip Khasnabish
 ZTE (TX) Inc.
 55 Madison Ave, Suite 302
 Morristown, New Jersey  07960
 United States
 Phone: +001-781-752-8003
 Email: vumip1@gmail.com, bhumip.khasnabish@ztetx.com
 URI:   http://tinyurl.com/bhumip/
 Anthony Nadalin
 Microsoft
 Email: tonynad@microsoft.com
 Zachary Zeltsan
 Individual
 Email: Zachary.Zeltsan@gmail.com

LI, et al. Informational [Page 19]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc7642.txt · Last modified: 2015/09/25 23:19 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki