Open PieterKas opened 1 month ago
I think we moved away from sub_id
to just using sub
. However, the larger question is an interesting one. Is there a case where in completing a requested transaction, one of the calls to one of the workloads SHOULD NOT receive the sub
claim. Is the TraT then leaking information? I haven't thought about this more than writing this comment :)
Hmm. interesting question. We do not have a means of creating constrained versions of TraTs today. I'd punt this for later though. I'm not sure this is critical to the TraTs draft as of now.
I agree. Within a single trust domain, this is probably less of an issue.
Is a sub_id considered constant throughout the transaction, or can this change over time. If it does change, how should the "old sub_id" be recorded? As part of the azd claim? Should we add information to that effect?
@tulshi and @gffletch