Article by Kevin Savetz

First Published:
Date Published:
Copyright © by Kevin Savetz


The struggle to remember two dozen different passwords to access two dozen Web sites could, one day, be a thing of the past. The days of requiring users to register for your Web site, then painstakingly verifying each user's identity, could similarly be passing.

Federated identity management will change the way consumers, businesses, and the government think about online authentication. That is, if the Electronic Authentication Partnership (EAP) does what it has set out to do.

The purpose of the stakeholder organization is to establish the rules that will let different authentication systems work together, not on a technological level, but on a policy level. The EAP is establishing technology-neutral procedures for federated identity management.

"A lot of people have focused on this as a technology problem. But there is a set of policy issues, of governance issues, that aren't being addressed. That's what the EAP is going to address," said Jim Lewis, interim chair of the EAP. Lewis is also senior fellow for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonpartisan research organization.

The group is tackling issues such as assigning levels of trust for a credentialing system, determining rules for issuing credentials, and creating a process for accessing the trustworthiness of credentials. "Right now these are either ad hoc or nonexistent," Lewis said.

With these rules in place, disparate systems will be able to share authentication data and rely on the data provided by other systems. For instance, when a user wants to log into a bank or credit card Web site, an outside organization could, based on digital signature, guarantee that the user at the keyboard is indeed who he claims to be.

The 39 current members of the EAP include Wells Fargo Bank, VeriSign, Microsoft, and the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) - a broad mix of service providers, credential issuers, trade groups, and governments.

Member organizations must agree to follow the EAP's rules regarding interoperability of electronic authentication systems. The EAP's rules, which are still being drafted, will have more teeth than a best-practices policy. A common problem with "best practices" groups is that they don't breed confidence, Lewis said. "'I promise that, on good days, I will try to ' that does not lead to trust. We need something that is a little tougher than best practices. We need people to commit to do these things, and to be accessed and tested," he said.

Members of the group hope to have a set of pilot rules in place by the end of the year, then formalize a final set in the second half of 2005.

The EAP's rules for interoperability of authentication systems will lower the costs and risk of online authentication for member organizations, Lewis said. "It lowers their costs because they may not have to get into the credentialing business - they may be able to use someone else's credentials. It lowers risk because when you get a credential you will have an external standard against which you can measure it."

One issue the group will have to tackle is how to determine the level of assurances that will exist for credentials. This will depend on the organization that issued the credential and how heartily it vouches for it.

Rules will follow models already established in the financial services sector. Under the EAP's plan, a credential may have any of four levels of assurance. More stringent vetting means a higher level of assurance, which would allow more sophisticated transactions. "You might need one level to go to a federal Web site and reserve space on a campground. You might need a different level if you want to check your social security file, and a different level to apply for a mortgage," said Helena Sims, secretariat of the EAP and senior director for public/private partnerships at NACHA, The Electronic Payments Association.

NACHA is providing staffing and behind-the-scenes support for the EAP while the fledgling group selects a board, files articles of incorporation, and manages other start-up tasks.

The federal government is a member of the organization. "We need common authentication services within the federal government. We didn't want 2,000 different ways to sign on to government Web sites," David Temoshok, vice chair of the EAP, said. Temoshok is the director of identity policy and management for the GSA Office of Governmentwide Policy.

"We see federation of identity as necessary for what we need to do for providing common authentication services to the federal government," Temoshok said. It makes sense for industry to support the same or similar trust requirements, standards, and processes, he said. "There's a broader public interest here, as we create this big federation for the federal government, they ought to be able to do that outside of the federal government as well," he said.

Federated identity could ultimately make the Internet more useful and safer for everyone. After signing on to view an online statement at Wells Fargo, a user might be able to check an account at Charles Schwab, then be routed to the Social Security Administration to check on benefits and earnings, all without having to sign off from one system, sign on to another, and register at each.

"In order for us do to that in the federal government, we are going to have to trust that process by which the Wells Fargo customer signed on to their home banking account," Temoshok said.

A key will be doing so without relying on proprietary systems. "We are interested in being able to provide for multiple products, multiple technologies, multiple protocols, because the 280 million Americans out there are going to want to make choices," Temoshok said.


Articles by Kevin Savetz