Law Enforcement Information Sharing Program (LEISP) Federated Identity Management Pilot February 27, 2006

Federated Identity Management Pilot

Benefits of Federated Identity Management More information (relevant information, critical information) becomes available to more users Enabled single sign-on (authenticate once – authorize many) Faster response time in critical situations Enhanced user experience Personalization (based on attributes, streamline information dissemination) Policy Control (separation of authentication and authorization) Auditing Improved alliances across government entities Streamline vetting Cost avoidance Cost Reduction Reduced Time to Net Improved interoperability Dynamic provisioning and de-provisioning Faster response time Greater security

Expected Results of the Pilot Provide value to users (e.g. access to applications that they did not have) Establish a model for joint interoperability with federal, state and regional efforts to improve information sharing to combat crime and terrorism in the context of a tangible project involving multiple organizations (DOJ, DHS, RISS, FBI) Confirm the applicability of Federated Identity management as a tool for enhancing information sharing Confirm the viability of the trusted broker architecture Evaluate the quality of user experience and use this feedback to tune the next phase and implementation Better understand challenges in implementation (organizational, contractual, technical and legal) Narrow technical and strategic options for full scale implementation and estimate implementation costs Identify aspects of the pilot suitable to be leveraged to other domains Provide a platform where best practices in identity management can be shared and tested

One user accessing one application Steps in provisioning access: Vetting (who are you?) Permissioning (what can you access?) Credentialing (how do I know it’s you? – passwords, smart cards, etc.) Access requires authentication of credentials User Application

One user accessing many applications Steps in provisioning access: Vetting Permissioning Credentialing RESULT: Each application must perform all steps above User must keep track of N sets of credentials 1 × N 2 N

Many users accessing many applications 1 Steps in provisioning access: Vetting Permissioning Credentialing RESULTS: Multifactor credentials & vetting become too expensive Vetting & credentialing not done well. Vetting too far from user to be kept up to date effectively High barrier to access 1 Expensive!! × M × N 2 2 N M

Federated Identity Management Access Provisioning Provisioning identity (vetting and credentialing) with the organization (×M) Provisioning accounts (permissioning) with applications (×M×N) RESULTS Huge savings in vetting and credentialing M<<M×N Vetting is better – closer to the user since own organization does vetting Credentialing is better – can afford multifactor Lower barriers to access – more access Each users only needs one credential (Single sign-on) Faster account provisioning Faster and easier account de-provisioning 1 1 2 2 Trusted Broker N K K Organizations M Users N Applications

Trusted Broker Mechanism Identity Providers Certified, trusted identity providers verify users’ credentials and assert identity to the broker (SAML, PKI, WS-F) Trusted Broker Asserts identity to the applications (SAML) Protocol translation if required (different versions of technology) Applications Accept assertions of identity from the trusted broker Make access decisions (authorization) 1 Identity Provider 1 Assert Identity Identity Provider 2 2 Trusted Broker Assert Identity Identity Provider N K K Organizations M Users N Applications

Alignment of LEISP Vision for Identity Management with e-auth GSA e-Auth has been briefed GSA e-auth leadership is supportive of LEISP vision Conceptually aligned (but LEISP focus is LE & CT) Broker based architecture is more flexible Not everyone needs to use identical technology Physical connectivity requirements are simplified Additional flexibility in user access controls Additional capabilities for provisioning/de-provisioning Re-authentication and global logout capabilities Other sub-federations (e.g. health) may eventually forge inter-federation trust and interoperability