Identity Governance Framework (IGF) Overview and Status Phil Hunt and Prateek Mishra Agenda Introduction Use Cases Standardization Path Q&A
Liberty Alliance Standards development organization focused around enterprise use-cases enable a networked world based on open standards Range of activitiies around assurance, federation, privacy Standards developed include ID-FF (precursor to SAML 2.0), ID-WSF, Identity Assurance frameworks http://www.projectliberty.org Observations about Identity Data Names, home addresses, phone numbers, social security number, rank, e-mail address, Essential to enterprises and web sites providing
services to customers Business applications cannot function without identity information Multiple sources of data (attribute authorities) Enterprise View: HR, CRM, Partners, IT Directory, Departmental Systems, Internet View: Portals, users, banks, employers, governments, retail, identity processors (background and credit checks) Concerns about identity data Increasing legal and regulatory focus Privacy concerns: HIPAA, SB 1386, theft Compliance: SOX, GLB, EU legislation Industry vertical regulations: credit bureaus, credit-card processors (PCI standard)
With each new heist or problem, new regulation or best practice model There are going to be more issues in the future How can the enterprise reduce risk associated with storing and using identity data? Lock it all up! With each new regulation conduct forensic scanning and analysis of systems Invest in an architecture that supports a governance model for identity Identity Governance Framework Open architecture that addresses governance of identity related information within the enterprise Standards development ongoing at the Liberty Alliance Open source implementation being created at
http://www.openliberty.org Addresses gap between high-level assurance and regulatory requirements and lower-level protocols and architecture Privacy aware architecture that can express many different constraints and requirements Overlays on existing infrastructure at enterprises Assurance Liberty IAF, PCI, Privacy Legislation Best Practices Governance IGF
XACML Audit Standard? Requirements that an enterprise or group of enterprises should meet to obtain certification. impacts Policy creation and update, policy enforcement, audit, decision explanation impacts Run-time Protocols SQL, SAML 2.0 WS-*, LDAP
Run-time protocols and wire representations. IGF Focus How to reduce the risk associated with creation, maintenance and use of identity data? Who has access to my social security number or account number, and, under what conditions? Declarative statements (aka policies) published by consumers (applications, services) and sources of identity data (attribute authorities) Enterprises can audit and implement governance against these policies Observations on Key Roles
Users Capture what agreements the user accepted Reflect consent and purpose of data use But IGF does not directly address interactions with users Application developers are not identity experts How can they express application identity requirements? Tools and frameworks for developers are a key focus for IGF Identity Administrators Identity-related data is distributed & web based User consent must be supported and enforced Enable owners of identity data to express use constraints Agenda
Introduction Components and Use Cases Standardization Path Q&A IGF Components CARML Defines application identity requirements what identity information an application needs and how the application will use it. AAPML Defines identity use policies (XACML) Constraints on user and application access to personal data
obligations and conditions under which data is to be released Attribute Service Links applications to identity data Developer APIs/Tools Developers can express identity requirements at a business level at development time Key to IGF adoption/use Components CARML (kaar-mull): Client Attribute Requirements Markup Language Declarative model for identity interactions by applications List of required/optional attributes and types, other properties Includes some support for update of identity data Developers focus on app business requirements for
identity-related data Developers and deployers express privacy rules followed by application Will the data be stored by the app? For how long? What purpose is it being used for? CARML Use-Case Application developer lists their identity requirements in CARML file Last four digits of user social security number User home address Office location in which user is employed None of this data is stored or forwarded to other applications Application is delivered to customers WidgetFactory, Inc. uses AD for employment level and office location, Oracle database for social security numbers AcmeCo uses MySQL database for office location, employment
level, proprietary application for social security number. Administrators review CARML file and connect to appropriate back-end resources Ensure that enterprise privacy constraints are met by applications Components Attribute Authorities AAPML (aap-mull): Attribute Authority Policy Markup Language Describes constraints on use of attribute data Declarative policy model for authorities that provide attributes Contextual rule support who is asking for the data? On whose behalf? For what purpose? User-consent support
Direct enforcement policy Obligations & declarations Proposed as XACML Profile Sample AAPML Rules Users can update only their own contact information and personal data List of attributes: telephone number, contact information, mailing address, emergency information Authorized Subjects: Application SelfService, authenticated user Target Records: must match the authenticated user context. Auth Requirements: Proof of application authentication required Rights: Read + Write
Consent: Not required Marketing applications can access certain user attributes provided explicit user-consent is available List of attributes: name, address, e-mail Authorized Subjects: Any authenticated user with attribute employee, Any application in marketing Auth Requirements: None Target Records: any Rights: Read Consent: consent record based on agreement of Dec 10, 2006 must be available Components Identity Service:
Many possible realizations or implementations Could be client integrated, middleware server, or sourceserver integrated based service Read/Write attributes from many different sources using various protocols Sample Architecture .NET Java API Applications Client Apps Applications
AAPML : AAPMLUse : Attribute AAPML : Attribute Use Policy Attribute Use Policy Policy Authority1 End-User(s)
Applications View A Identity Policy Engine Delivery/Gateway/ Enforcement API API Existing Applications
Departmental Systems Standard Components Existing or non-specified Authority5 Enterprise Directory IGF Part 1: Foundations Multi-protocol (LDAP, SQL, SAML, ID-WSF, ..) Focus on producers and consumers of identity data
IGF Part 2: AAPML Many distributed authorities, each capable of expressing constraints on use of identity data IGF Part 3: Declarative Applications Applications publish requirements for identity data IGF Part 4: App Developer and Enterprise Administrators Application Developer Identity needs of business applications expressed at a high-level Application developers lack identity middleware expertise
Declarative model is preferred Ability to express identity requirements at a businesslevel without regard to sources Enterprise Administrators Support for deployment-time binding to specific identity architectures which vary over time and between enterprises Declarative approach simplifies compliance and configuration IGF Lifecycle Agenda
Introduction Use Cases Standardization Path Q&A Nov 2006: Oracle Announces IGF 1. Open-vendor initiative to address handling of identity related information within enterprise lead by Oracle 2. Released key draft specifications CARML and AAPML Sample CARML API Announced intention to submit to a standards org 3. Key vendors supported initiative CA, Layer 7, HP, Novell, Ping Identity, Securent, Sun Microsystems
1H2007: Liberty Alliance Start of broader review on gathering expanded use-cases and market requirements Oracle makes IGF straw-man specifications available royalty-free Participation from: Computer Associates, France Telecom/Orange, Fugen, HP, Intel, NEC, New Zealand, NTT, Oracle IGF Market Requirements Document Released July 2007 Use-cases, Scenarios, End-to-End Examples www.projectliberty.org/index.php/liberty/ strategic_initiatives/identity_governance
Next Steps (2007-2008) Two parts Development of open source components at www.openliberty.org Anticipate release of some components in 1H08 Technical work specifications and profiles to continue at Liberty Alliance and complete in 2H-2008 Follows successful completion and publication of IGF Market Requirements Document within Liberty Alliance Anticipate release of some working drafts in 1H08 Supported by HP, CA, NEC, NTT, Novell, SUN and other partners Open Source Hosted at www.openLiberty.com
Based upon Apache 2.0 license Create software libraries aimed at developers Aligned with open source ecosystem (Higgins, Bandit) Re-use existing components wherever possible In parallel with creation of Liberty final specification drafts Draft of CARML-compliant Attribute Services API available today Summary Identity Governance Framework Open initiative for identity governance across enterprise systems Key draft specifications provide initial policy components CARML, AAPML Intent to ratify as full standards at an existing standards
body Under Liberty Alliance Leadership Broad input and support in an open standards process Legal community review IP clearances - open standards for everyone to use Learn More www.projectliberty.org/index.php/liberty/strategic_initiatives/identity_governance
IGF Overview Whitepaper FAQ Use Cases (MRD) Links to Oracle draft specifications: CARML, AAPML, Client API Inquiries to Mail: [email protected] & [email protected] Blog: blogs.oracle.com/identityprivacy Q &A
Abundant capital. New, talented group of businessmen [entrepreneurs] and advisors. ... Knights of Labor. Knights of Labor trade card. Goals of the Knights of Labor. Eight-hour workday. Workers' cooperatives. ... The Rise of Big Business
If a bullet enters from the right, there will be more chipping on the left. There will be short radial fractures on the right and longer radial fractures on the left; it would be reversed in shots fired from the...
Kelso's ChoicesConflict Resolution. 3rd Grade . Mrs. Morton, Counselor. Big and Small Problems. Sometimes YOU can handle a problem or conflict. Other times you need an adult's help. How can you tell the difference? Small Problems.
Initiated thematic programming concept starting with the 2006 fall national meeting. Worked with M&E, ComSci to create the Multidisciplinary Program Planning Group to oversee continuing thematic programming. Reviewed division allocation formula for Council: Dallas 2014. Sponsors annual Leaders' Track at...
Take it or Leave it. What is erosion? Deposition? What are agents of both erosion and deposition? Wind, water, ice, and gravity. With your table on the paper provided, make a sketch of both erosion and deposition.
A stanza is "a group of lines in a poem, separated by spaces from other stanzas, much like a paragraph in prose." A . couplet. is "two lines of poetry, one after the other, that rhyme and are of the...
Define business ethics and social responsibility and examine their importance. LO 2-2. Detect some of the ethical issues that may arise in business. ... nonverbal and manipulative threatening expressions. Recognizing Ethical Issues. 2-Misuse of Company Time.
Ready to download the document? Go ahead and hit continue!