Support for X509SubjectName Name ID

Mak, Steve makst at
Fri May 15 15:27:19 UTC 2020

He's saying you have a LOT to worry about if the other side of the SAML relationship is accepting unsigned SAML responses.  If you choose to integrate with an SP that accepts unsigned SAML responses you're risking major account impersonation among a number of other security risks.

If I found out an SP was accepting unsigned I would immediately pull that SP metadata out of my IDP.

From: users <users-bounces at> on behalf of "Ullfig, Roberto Alfredo" <rullfig at>
Reply-To: Shib Users <users at>
Date: Friday, May 15, 2020 at 11:20
To: Shib Users <users at>
Subject: Re: Support for X509SubjectName Name ID

Signing is the default - not following you.

Roberto Ullfig - rullfig at
Systems Administrator
Enterprise Architecture and Development | ACCC
University of Illinois - Chicago
From: users <users-bounces at> on behalf of Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 9:59 AM
To: Shib Users <users at>
Subject: Re: Support for X509SubjectName Name ID

On 5/15/20, 10:21 AM, "users on behalf of Ullfig, Roberto Alfredo" <users-bounces at on behalf of rullfig at> wrote:

> OK fixed that, there were a handful - the settings must have been set false while testing a new SP implementation then
> propagated to a few others. All applications work with default settings now.

It's much more serious. It's not whether they work with defaults, it's whether they work with no signing. That is a total security break. And yes, lots of those exist. More common is the "accept any signing key" bug, but this exists too.

-- Scott

For Consortium Member technical support, see
To unsubscribe from this list send an email to users-unsubscribe at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the users mailing list