Skip to content

doc: narrow TEA authentication guidance#236

Open
MChorfa wants to merge 4 commits intoCycloneDX:mainfrom
MChorfa:spec-auth-guidance
Open

doc: narrow TEA authentication guidance#236
MChorfa wants to merge 4 commits intoCycloneDX:mainfrom
MChorfa:spec-auth-guidance

Conversation

@MChorfa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@MChorfa MChorfa commented Mar 30, 2026

Summary

This PR is a focused split from #235 and contains only doc/authentication.md.

What changed

  • removes hard-coded universal claims such as a mandatory TLS 1.3 minimum and specific client certificate algorithms
  • describes bearer tokens and mTLS as common deployment patterns
  • states that stricter TLS baselines belong in a TEA profile or deployment baseline
  • references OWASP TLS guidance and NIST SP 800-52 Rev. 2

Intent

Address review feedback that the prior TLS language was too broad and not grounded enough for the base TEA specification.

Mohamed Chorfa added 4 commits March 29, 2026 19:08
Signed-off-by: Mohamed Chorfa <mohamed.chorfa@thalesgroup.com>
Signed-off-by: Mohamed Chorfa <mohamed.chorfa@thalesgroup.com>
Signed-off-by: Mohamed Chorfa <mohamed.chorfa@thalesgroup.com>
Signed-off-by: Mohamed Chorfa <mohamed.chorfa@thalesgroup.com>
@MChorfa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

MChorfa commented Mar 30, 2026

Following the feedback on #235: the earlier TLS wording was carried forward from the broader draft rather than intended as a final universal base-spec requirement, and the concern about it being too prescriptive was fair.

This follow-up narrows the document to deployment patterns, keeps only the base expectation that protected TEA endpoints use TLS, and leaves stricter transport baselines to TEA profiles or deployment policy.

@oej
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

oej commented Mar 30, 2026

Is a new document needed? What is missing in the current documentation?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants