You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At the Cloud Identity Summit in July 2014, there was some discussion of sourcing a single user's information through a SCIM interface in combination with OpenID Connect. The same idea applies to UMA's claim profiling: A claims-aware client could push SCIM-encoded user information to the AS. Should this be considered as an additional profile in the Claim Profiles spec?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It seems valuable to at least include this as an option. SCIM may or may not gain real traction (I suspect it will, though it may take time), but supporting interoperability at this stage costs us relatively little and may be helpful longer term.
At the Cloud Identity Summit in July 2014, there was some discussion of sourcing a single user's information through a SCIM interface in combination with OpenID Connect. The same idea applies to UMA's claim profiling: A claims-aware client could push SCIM-encoded user information to the AS. Should this be considered as an additional profile in the Claim Profiles spec?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/98.
At the Cloud Identity Summit in July 2014, there was some discussion of sourcing a single user's information through a SCIM interface in combination with OpenID Connect. The same idea applies to UMA's claim profiling: A claims-aware client could push SCIM-encoded user information to the AS. Should this be considered as an additional profile in the Claim Profiles spec?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: