> The other question which arose in the last Liberty interop test was about
> the signature algorithm DSAwithSHA1. Section 4.1 of SAMLConf states that
> DSAwithSHA1 is recommended but not required in SAML 2.0. However, it is
> mandated for XML signature. One participant could not support DSAwithSHA1
so
> we had to require all signatures to be with RSAwithSHA1.
Well, just because XMLSig requires something doesn't mean SAML has to. It
means we *could* without burdening people too much, but that's about it.
> Our question is one of background on this issue. Why was DSAwithSHA1
support
> not required in SAML despite the XMLSig mandate? And, are these
requirements
> still necessary going forward. Thanks.
I have no memory of it specifically, maybe somebody else does. I suspect it
was just a general sense that requiring something without a good reason was
a bad thing.
-- Scott
