Member comment
I always think of access-security as like a three-legged stool, with the organization sitting on the stool. I've worked in these areas since 1984.
The legs are 1) Authentication, 2) Access-requirements, and 3) Authorization.
PKI and biometric capabilities take care of 1)Authentication. Access-specifications (like a lock's mechanism) and resource/asset permission mechanisms take care of the 2) Authorization.
The hard part is 2) Access-requirements (like a key to turn the lock's mechanism to then open the lock). There are many methods for determining who (person or process) needs access to what (resource or process). The most effective method is going to include some form of visible role-based or "attribute-based" access requirement definition and governance.
I believe that a comprehensive domain terminology provides the best mechanism for 2) Access-requirement definition, tracking, and governance.
Terminology and Terminology Servers are already part of some "access and distribution" provisioning systems (often called "policy servers"). But, consistent terminology across domains is usually not available, so access-requirements management across domains is usually not available, so access-security across domains is usually not available.
Solution: whatever information technology and underlying data structure/syntax is used for access-security, there needs to be a consistent terminology method that will result in cross-domain, cross-organizational 2) Access-requirement definition and management. For this, I recommend a single endeavor-wide (ARRA, for Nation) terminology design and implementation (which would be its own first access-security customer).
Comment from
RoyERoebuck
at
One World Information System
on
Apr 30, 2009