RFC | SCIM Requirements | September 2015 |
LI, et al. | RFC 7642 | [Page] |
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.¶
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
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). Further information on Internet Standards is available in 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. ¶
Copyright ©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 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. ¶
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). ¶
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "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:¶
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.¶
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.¶
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:¶ 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.¶ 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:¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ 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.¶ This section lists the SCIM use cases.¶ 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:¶ Post-conditions:¶ Requirements¶ 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.¶ Pre-conditions:¶ Post-conditions:¶ Bob has received the requested service from an
application running on AnotherCSP without having to authenticate
to that application explicitly.¶ Requirements¶ 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:¶ Post-conditions:¶ Requirements¶ 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:¶ 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.¶ Requirements¶ 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.¶ 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:¶ Post-conditions:¶ Directory service A is able to notify relying party B
that there are changes potentially of interest.¶ Requirements¶ 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.¶ 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].¶ TThe 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.¶
2.2.
Model Concepts
2.2.1.
Triggers
2.2.2.
Actors
2.2.3.
Modes and Flows
2.2.4.
Bulk and Batch Operational Semantics
2.3.
Flows from
Cloud Service Provider to Cloud Service Provider
(CSP->CSP)
2.3.1.
CSP->CSP: Create Identity (Push)
2.3.2.
CSP->CSP: Update Identity (Push)
2.3.3.
CSP->CSP: Delete Identity (Push)
2.3.4.
CSP->CSP: SSO Trigger (Push)
2.3.5.
CSP->CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)
2.3.6.
CSP->CSP: Password Reset (Push)
2.4.
Flows from
Enterprise Cloud Subscriber to Cloud Service Provider
(ECS->CSP)
2.4.1.
ECS->CSP: Create Identity (Push)
2.4.2.
ECS->CSP: Update Identity (Push)
2.4.3.
ECS->CSP: Delete Identity (Push)
2.4.4.
ECS->CSP: SSO Trigger (Pull)
3.
SCIM Use Cases
3.1.
Migration of the Identities
3.2.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Service
3.3.
Provisioning of
the User Accounts for a Community of Interest (COI)
3.4.
Provisioning of
the User Accounts for a Community of Interest (COI)
3.5.
Change Notification
4.
Security Considerations
5.
References
5.1.
Normative References
5.2.
Informative References
Acknowledgements