1. Overview of The U.T. System Identity Management Federation
EDUCAUSE Fed/Ed PKI Meeting
Fall 2006

2. Agenda
Background
What have we done?
How did we do it?
Why did we do it?
How do we govern it?
What does the future hold?

3. Background 16 Institutions
9 academic
6 health
1 System Administration
16 unique organizations, budgets, problems, ideas
Drivers for change:
Collaboration
Shared Services
Compliance
Reduced sign-on

4. Established the U.T. System Identity Management Federation
What have we done?
Established the U.T. System Identity Management Federation
16 UT institutions
Federation and Member (IdP and SP) policies
Shibboleth/SAML
VeriSign PKI

5. How did we do it? IdM Statement of Direction
NMI-EDIT “Extending The Reach” grant
Shibboleth IdP InstallFest and SP Fest (a year later)
Shibb’d some low-risk apps (guest wireless, financial reporting)
Now have about 10 apps, including student couponing, legal tracking, research tracking, collaborative funding, and more)
Currently in production, but still a long way to go

6. Why did we do it?
We felt it best to address IdM on an administrative boundary - could happen quicker if we do it within the system.
We had an established organizational and governance structure throughout UT System and wanted to use it for IdM
We want to strive for providing infrastructure and policy to meet higher LoAs throughout UT System

7. How do we govern it?
UT Federation Executive Committee
UT System Office of Internal Audit
Institutional Internal Audit offices
Technical and Policy committees
Student project :)

8. What does the future hold?
Maturity (policy revisions, support models, VOs, etc)
Higher LoAs
More apps (and more important ones like grids)
Inter-federation (TIGRE, HAM-TMC, TDL, etc.)

9. Thank you!