Attributes Encrypted in V3 versus V2

[Nanda Cairns]

Scott.

Thank you. You are correct (as 99.9999% of the times).

Thank you for the hint. The cloud vendor had 2 very similar entityIDs, in
v2 it did not matter w.r.t how we had set up in relying-party.xml. But in
v3, it is much tighter, which we love, aside from our mistake.


On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 6:58 PM Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> > For a cloud service, via saml-tracer, the attributes are encrypted in v3
> (whereas
> > in v2, it was unencrypted). The cloud metadata was imported as is (no
> changes)
> > -- only change is the entry below in relying-party.xml, where I've been
> trying to
> > send with attribute values unencrypted. Have I missed anything else?
>
> No. That can't be the case, ergo that isn't actually your configuration
> and/or isn't the entityID of the relevant SP and isn't an applicable
> override.
>
> -- Scott
>
> --
> For Consortium Member technical support, see
> https://wiki.shibboleth.net/confluence/x/coFAAg
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20181210/027c727e/attachment.html>