1 / 25

Comparison of different security infrastructure implementations

Comparison of different security infrastructure implementations. Olle Mulmo, KTH. Before we take the next step forward…. Stop and take a breath Look at what people have done so far Try to compare Be ignorant to technology details. State of the world. 3 rd party. RA. Org. Org. Org. gw.

abrial
Download Presentation

Comparison of different security infrastructure implementations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of different security infrastructure implementations Olle Mulmo, KTH

  2. Before wetake the next step forward… • Stop and take a breath • Look at what people have done so far • Try to compare • Be ignorant to technology details

  3. State of the world 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw

  4. Analyzed Characteristics • Underlying Assumptions • Usage scenario • Lifetime & scale of operations • Setup • Trust anchors • Commitments

  5. Analyzed Characteristics (cont) • Registration • Bootstrap for a resource provider • Bootstrap for a user • Security concerns • Local control • Privacy • Audit • Acceptance

  6. Analyzed Characteristics (cont) • Dynamics • Setup & Registration “lightweight”? • Adding/removing a user • Adding/removing a member org • Handling Lusers and Loosers

  7. Scenarios • Unique ID & VO affiliation • Federation / gateway model • VO control + sandboxing

  8. trust VO msg Unique ID & VO affiliation (#1) 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw VO VO

  9. trust VO msg Unique ID & VO affiliation (#2) 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw VO VO

  10. trust VO msg Unique ID & VO affiliation (#3) 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw VO VO

  11. Unique ID & VO affiliation • Different trust sources for AuthN and AuthZ • Local control • Allows for widely different levels of operational trust

  12. trust ?? VO msg Federation / gateway model (#1) 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw

  13. trust VO msg Federation / gateway model (#2) 3rd party RA Org Org Org gw gw gw

  14. Federation / gateway model • Organizational based trust • Assumptions on infrastructure • Higher demands on operational trust

  15. trust VO msg VO control + sandboxing 3rd party RA Org Org Org VO

  16. trust VO msg VO control + sandboxing 3rd party RA Org Org Org VO

  17. VO control + sandboxing • VO runs the show • Prepackaged, domain specific • Little or no local control • Trust by reputation

  18. Comparisons • I have tried my best to be impartial and objective • “Is this hard to do or not?” • Over-simplified conclusions • “difficult” vs “easy”

  19. Comparisons • Lack of support for short-lived lifetimes & small-scale operations

  20. Comparisons

  21. Comparisons

  22. Comparisons

  23. Comparisons

  24. Conclusions • No single model strikes out as #1 • Lack of support for short-lived, small-scale, light-weight operations

  25. Topics for discussion • What model is most likely a best fit fora) academia, b) industry? • Are there alternatives? • What characteristics should we focus on in the near-term?

More Related