China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Identities
Published in Jianbin Gao, Qi Xia, Kwame Omono Asamoah, Bonsu Adjei-Arthur, Smart Cities, 2023
Jianbin Gao, Qi Xia, Kwame Omono Asamoah, Bonsu Adjei-Arthur
Identity has gone through four stages: centralized, federated, user-centric, and self-sovereign. Central identity: Control by a single expert or hierarchy. For example, while issuing a national ID card, the government oversees and stores all personal data in one central database.Federated identity: It enables sharing of IDs and attributes among organizations in a defined circle of trust, such as citizens using national identity providers.User-centric identity: By decentralizing identity, clients can have greater protection and control over their personal data.Self-sovereign identity: An individual has sole control over their account and personal information. They can be independent of central authorities if they are sovereign.
Finding Value
Published in Kirk Hausman, Sustainable Enterprise Architecture, 2011
Enterprise planning and execution will take time to implement correctly and with a minimum of disruption to users and business units. Because the process can be somewhat protracted, it is important to identify useful tools to provide integration and federation of resources during the mid-migration period. Two common types of federated technology solutions involve identity management and data. Federated identity management. These solutions sit above the various authentication pools and provide translation or synchronization between security principals. Sometimes referred to as a meta-directory, a federated identity management solution can improve transparency between legacy solutions and a modernized or consolidated architecture. As legislative mandates for accountability and privacy increase in number, such meta-directories fulfill compliance reporting and control functions beyond simple authentica tion translation.Federated data. The concept of federated data management evolved to meet the growing need to track information as it passes through an organization’s various applications and data stores. Such meta-data may be aggregated information or it may be “data about the data,” and it is often used in data warehouse and business intelligence applications. The service-oriented architectural approach to application design also makes use of data federation in order to decouple storage of data from transfer and processing between disparate modules. Standards such as XML and UDDI expand information to natively include meta-data that may be useful in data federation.
A Blockchain Based Decentralized Identifiers for Entity Authentication in Electronic Health Records
Published in Cogent Engineering, 2022
Manoj T, Krishnamoorthi Makkithaya, Narendra V G
The authentication of entities can be achieved by binding centralized identifiers to cryptographically generated keys, signatures and certificates with the help of public key infrastructure (PKI). Some of the earlier studies that demonstrated the role of PKI in healthcare based authentication schemes includes multi-biometric key generation in cloud framework (Khan et al., 2014), Burrows-Abadi-Needham(BAN) logic combined with Elliptical Curve Cryptography (ECC; He & Wang, 2015), ECC and three-party key agreement (Odelu et al., 2015), random oracle model (Chatterjee et al., 2018) and centralized identifiers integrated with continuous biometric authentication in cloud (Farid et al., 2021). The primary issue with all the mechanisms associated with public key cryptography-based authentication is that identifier tied with the public key is controlled by either IDPs or service providers (SPs). The federated identity schemes such as OAuth, OpenID, and Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) try to address identity silos created by multiple identifiers. The authentication schemes proposed by Bahga et al (Bahga & Madisetti, 2013) and Mandel et al., (Mandel et al., 2016) in the EHR environment makes use of SAML based Single Sign-On (SSO) method and Open ID Connect, respectively. Inspite of providing the relaxation from using multiple identifiers by federated identity mechanism, it suffers from the single point of failure problem, which could leave entities inaccessible to relying parties and also enable a service provider to breach the trust by masquerading as a user (Lesavre et al., 2019).