Hey folks

A few thoughts, in no particular order:
Agree that covering audit (and other GRC topics) is sensible.

Some other things I didn't immediately see (though may well have just missed):

Not sure if any of this is helpful... but, you know, >dev/null if not :)

--&e








On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Thorsten H. Niebuhr [WedaCon GmbH] <tniebuhr@wedacon.net> wrote:

thx Stu,

I have added the matrix as I have understood it (which may be totally wrong). What exactly was thought to be 'lifecycle'?


Thorsten


On 30.01.2017 23:44, Stu Lincoln wrote:
I see the document is now in place and have started a data dump under management. I will finish off by 12pm EST Tuesday. So we can all review the complete document and matrix.

Thanks

Stu

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:21 PM Andrew Hughes <andrewhughes3000@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Janelle - not to worry, this conversation will be going on for a long time :)

We've got a segment called 'Management' - that might be the spot for audit

Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP 
Independent Consultant
In Turn Information Management Consulting

o  +1 650.209.7542
m +1 250.888.9474
1249 Palmer Road,
Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com 
ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/
Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security 


On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Janelle Allen <janelle@sharpshootn.com> wrote:
Hi Andrew,

I’m apologize for being so late to this conversation and this perhaps has been discussed but another item to consider adding to the BOK might be Auditing.  I know this itself is not really an identity subject so it may reside outside of the scope of the BOK but does seem to go hand in hand in hand; the familiar AAA services.  I can very much also understand any argument that it may not belong at all to the BOK at all but it might be worth considering if it has not been considered thus far.  Where should it belong a major heading unto itself?  A best practice?  

Kind Regards,

Janelle Allen


On Jan 27, 2017, at 2:22 AM, Thorsten H. Niebuhr [WedaCon GmbH] <tniebuhr@wedacon.net> wrote:

Re the 'real-life' scenarios and 'practices'

Would it be beneficial to use a common, general structure for each Area (Identity, Management,Authentication, Authorization)?, eg something like

  • Identities
    • Standards and Concepts
    • Regulations
    • Best-Practice
    • Protocols
  • Management
    • Standards and Concepts
    • Regulations
    • Best-Practice
    • Protocols
  • Authentication
    • Standards and Concepts
    • Regulations
    • Best-Practice
    • Protocols
  • Authorization
    • Standards and Concepts
    • Regulations
    • Best-Practice
    • Protocols


Given the current discussion, that would allow a sorting like below

  • Authorization
    • Standards and Concepts
      • Authorization Models
        • xBAC

      • Assertions
      • Trust Elevation
      • Assurance Levels
    • Regulations
      • EU-GDPR (related Articles)
      • EU- ePrivacy Regulation

    • Best-Practice
      • Centralized vs Decentralized
      • Policies


    • Protocols
      • UMA
      • OAuth


I first placed 'Protocols' in the 'Technology' Ring, but I think it make sense to use the same idea here as we have for the other layers (Operations, Implementation/Align-Plan-Organize). That would allow us to simple 'short-describe' the protocols and let the 'TechnologyRing' serve as a placeholder.


T.


On 23.01.2017 20:31, Ken Dagg wrote:
The could be one Sub heading in the Implementation Sub-section for each implementation. Subsections in each implementation could be a description of the implementation and lessons learned (positive and negative) from the implementation. I believe that this type of information would be valuable for IdPros to know because it provides real life examples of what has and has not worked.

Ken

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:01 PM Andrew Hughes <andrewhughes3000@gmail.com> wrote:
Hmmm... I'm not sure I follow on the 'implementations' idea...

Could you give some example sub-headings?

What kinds of practices should ID Pros know about? What facts/knowledge should they have?

andrew.

















Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP 
Independent Consultant
In Turn Information Management Consulting

o  +1 650.209.7542
m +1 250.888.9474


1249 Palmer Road,
Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com 
ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/
Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security 




On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Ken Dagg <kendaggtbs@gmail.com> wrote:
Andrew,

Great work!

Suggestions:
- Would the Considerations section be better as a sub section under Authorization Models. I believe that each model should have considerations.
- Should there be an Implementations sub-section that identifies where Authorization models have been implemented. This could include lessons learned.

Ken


On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:58 AM Andrew Hughes <andrewhughes3000@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi folks, here's my imperfect taxonomy for 'areas related to authorization and access control that an ID Pro should know about'. 

Please help to put the items in the right spots and correct errors!





  • Authorization
    • Authorization policy evaluation
      • Proofs of assertion (tokens, tickets, cookies, cryptographic methods)
        • Bearer methods v proof of possession methods
      • Access control policy, authorization policy, 
      • Static evaluation, dynamic evaluation
      • Is there an ‘authorization equation’ for policy evaluation?
        • e.g. Given an identified entity and a requested resource, select the correctly-scoped authorization policy, evaluate the policy, grant || deny || require trust elevation for the resource access, log the events
    • Relationship to Identification, Authentication, Access Control
      • The characteristics of each 
      • The 'cross-over' aspects of each (e.g. OAuth-style authentication via proof of resource access - is this related to an ‘authorization equation’ approach?)
    • Authorization models, processes, protocols
      • SAML, OAuth, UMA
      • Directories, decentralized models 
      • Access control models
        • RBAC
        • ABAC
      • Trust Elevation (e.g. re-authentication, step-up authentication, claims gathering)
    • Considerations for choosing specific models, protocols
      • Risk
      • Authorization model matching to credential characteristics, identification method, available authenticators
      • Centralized v decentralized
      • Degree of independence of authorization policy decision v access control decision
















Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP 
Independent Consultant
In Turn Information Management Consulting

o  +1 650.209.7542
m +1 250.888.9474
1249 Palmer Road,
Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com 
ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/
Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security 





_______________________________________________

DG-IDPro mailing list

DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org

http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro

--
Kenneth Dagg

Independent Consultant

Identification and Authentication

613-825-2091

kendaggtbs@gmail.com



--
Kenneth Dagg Independent Consultant Identification and Authentication 613-825-2091 kendaggtbs@gmail.com


_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro

_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro


_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro


_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro


_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro




--
Andrew Hindle
Hindle Consulting Limited
+44 7966 136543

Hindle Consulting Limited is a company registered in England and Wales.  Company number: 8888564.
Registered office: Claremont House, Deans Court, Bicester, Oxfordshire OX26 6BW, UK.