Open Identity Trust Frameworks
The key takeaways at a very high level were:
1) The IIW community reaffirmed that there is a real need and many real use cases for an trust framework model for open identity, and that a model that can accommodate mutliple trust frameworks in one infrastructure is a good direction.
2) The semantics around the terms for this model are extremely important - we spent half our time just explaining and refining (based on community feedback) the terms uses to describe the model.
3) The community strongly agreed that the model needs to address Levels of Protection (LOP) as well as Levels of Assurance (LOA) for identity information.
4) There was strong feedback and consensus that the model should support BOTH technical AND policy certifications and BOTH self-certification and third-party certification. So this matrix of all four combinations must be supported by the overall model, even if specific trust frameworks (such as the US ICAM trust framework) requires a subset of these options.
Lastly, we invited all community members who are interested to get involved, and invited them to contact either of us directly.