- Created by Josh Mandel, last modified by Joshua Procious on Nov 22, 2019
|
|
|
|
Powered by a free Atlassian Confluence Community License granted to Health Level Seven International. Evaluate Confluence today.
6 Comments
Kathleen Connor
3c. Security Risk
No Entry – I don’t think this entry can be blank in a valid PSS. Did the authors just miss this? Or is it okay to leave blank?
Carl Anderson
Edit: According to John Moehrke, this PSS field is intended for something very specific.
The IG itself will have a Security Considerations section where concerns around origin checking (implementation considerations, etc) would be mentioned.
My original comment:
John Moehrke
Security WG would request co-sponsorship. Any modification of SMART-on-FHIR, even if that modification is only to the context sharing, is relevant to the security that is provided by SMART-on-FHIR. changing the values in the SMART context through messaging can change the scope of the security context and make it inconsistent with the original scope of the security token used to initiate the SMART-on-FHIR context.
Frank Oemig
A minor remark: The involved company is T-System, but not T-Systems. This makes a difference.
Carl Anderson
Thanks, Frank. I have corrected the list to make it clearer that it's the singular "The T-System".
John Moehrke
What is the relationship of this project to FHIRCast? It seems to be covering similar functional space. I don't see mention of this relationship, and don't see involvement with the team working on FHIRCast Isaac Vetter? Should the Imaging Workgroup be a good co-sponsor given they are the sponsor of FHIRCast?