Authentication: refining and discussing research questions.

<sloandr> Current Authentication reference list, which has been slightly reorganised, is available at: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Authentication_references

ds: Have linked references to content for us

<sloandr> Authentication issue list: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Authentication_on_the_Web:_Issue_List

<sloandr> Authentication continues to be a focus of discussion by WCAG WG, who are considering requirements for authentication methods as part of WCAG.

<sloandr> jasonjgw: Authentication methods that place demands on cognitive, physical or sensory capabilities have clear accessibility implications

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2017Apr/0008.html

<sloandr> janina: read that Microsoft are deprecating passwords, see link just posted

<sloandr> janina: another significant approach is that users may be asked to record questions and answers they would be able to recall, which may be used for future authentication requests. This may also have implications on people with cognitive disabilities; refer to work of COGA WG for more detail.

<sloandr> jasonjgw: recall involves not just the answer but also the format in which it was initially expressed (e.g. spelling, use of capitals, punctuation marks)

<sloandr> scott_h: Windows 10 focusing on new authentication methods, away from passwords

<scribe> scribe: janina

ds: Some of work is to distinguish accessibility from economic requirements--cost of device
... Also, there are issues with the questions about yourself--i.e. name of pet if you've never had a pet

jgw: These questions could be cultural specific

ds: So, we need to disambiguate a11y from other usability/economic issues

sa: A note to show we do think this is relevant, that economic considerations are often steeper for pwds

<sloandr> jasonjgw: we have US and EU accessibility standards that reference biometric authentication; we need to reference these

<sloandr> jasonjgw: hardware devices with a visual display, which generate a time-limited token as part of an authentication process, are also a challenge

<sloandr> scott_h: what would be the main deliverable for our authentication work?

<sloandr> jasonjgw: partly for us to decide, and partly what APA WG needs

<sloandr> janina: APA view is from an accessibility perspective that we need something better than passwords, but that we need to influence alternatives so that accessibility is given due consideration.

<sloandr> janina: example of success is that requirement that one biometric indicator is insufficient for accessible authentication is now in US and EU accessibility standards

<sloandr> janina: discussions at TPAC 2016 raised some good questions, need to have follow-up at this year's TPAC—more detailed and scribed discussion with Authentication WG.

<sloandr> scott_h: original CAPTCHA note was helpful in framing revised and updated note; would be useful to have a similar framework to guide an Authentication note from RQTF, to help focus our efforts.

<sloandr> janina: we could approach APA and Authentication WG with request for guidance on structure and focus of an authentication deliverable

http://www.w3.org/Security/

<sloandr> jasonjgw: suggest we first focus reading on developing understanding key topics we are already aware of

http://www.w3.org/2015/12/web-authentication-charter.html

<sloandr> janina: encourages RQTF members to glance through current W3C specs relating to web authentication would help us become familiar with key areas of discussion

Other (including additional) research topics.

<sloandr> janina: COGA TF is publishing their gap analysis and roadmap document, plus supporting references. There's also a joint document between COGA and ARIA focusing on personalization; RQTF members encouraged to review this document

<sloandr> janina: APA have a wider concern regarding personalization, and how to do as much as possible with as least amount of tech as possible. There will be a call soon on this topic; RQTF members encouraged to attend

<sloandr> janina: COGA TF also meeting with the Low Vision TF from WCAG about personalization, and how it relates to WCAG

<sloandr> janina: thorough exploration of research into personalization and accessibility is needed, and RQTF can contribute

<sloandr> sloandr: challenge for RQTF to understand how best we can contribute, given so many interests and potentially different priorities for answers

<sloandr> jasonjgw: confident we will have research questions to answer, but not yet clear on what they are

<sloandr> jasonjgw: there's a personalization implementation problem that needs to be addressed

CAPTCHA: update and discussion

<sloandr> jasonjgw: has developed working draft, incorporated contribution from scott_h

<sloandr> Current draft: http://w3c.github.io/rqtf/captcha-notes.html

ds: References in two categories, identified specific a11y, and also more general references
... We need to ascertain we've covered all the significant refs
... Also a link to WCAG ...

<sloandr> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Captcha_Alternatives_and_thoughts

<sloandr> Note: current draft linked in the minutes is not in fact the latest version, so jasonjgw will share the latest version with the RQTF email list.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: janina, sloandr, jasonjgw, scott_h, shadi
Present: janina sloandr jasonjgw scott_h shadi
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 26 Apr 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/04/26-rqtf-minutes.html
People with action items: