remove MFA as a requirement #57
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Multi-factor implies more than one factor. I believe it should mention phishing resistance as a security property, rather than "factors".
|
While I don't disagree with the idea behind this PR, not all phishing resistant methods are MFA, and not all MFA is phishing resistant. Our language is messy on how we refer to the properties of authentication factors and we lack a consistent set of terminology. My point of view is that we should not prescribe which authentication mechanisms are used, rather, we should prescribe that something better than a single knowledge factor is used. |
frumioj
commented
Mar 5, 2025
| | IPSIE<br>LEVEL| Application (aka RP) | Identity Service | | ||
| |---------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | ||
| | SL1 | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 compliance <br>- Session lifetime MUST be set from the assertion | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 Compliance <br> - MUST enforce MFA and communicate an authentication class to the Application | | ||
| | SL1 | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 compliance <br>- Session lifetime MUST be set from the assertion | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 Compliance <br> - MUST enforce phishing resistance (such as MFA, or passkeys) and communicate an authentication class to the Application | |
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| | SL1 | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 compliance <br>- Session lifetime MUST be set from the assertion | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 Compliance <br> - MUST enforce phishing resistance (such as MFA, or passkeys) and communicate an authentication class to the Application | | |
| | SL1 | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 compliance <br>- Session lifetime MUST be set from the assertion | - MUST meet NIST 800-63-4 FAL2 Compliance <br> - MUST enforce a higher class of authentication than Single-Factor Authentication (SFA), such as MFA or passkeys, and communicate the authentication class used, to the Application | |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Multi-factor implies more than one factor. I believe it should mention phishing resistance as a security property, rather than "factors".