1 / 9

Overview of The U.T. System Identity Management Federation

Overview of The U.T. System Identity Management Federation. EDUCAUSE Fed/Ed PKI Meeting Fall 2006. 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?. Background. 16 Institutions 9 academic 6 health

Samuel
Download Presentation

Overview of The U.T. System Identity Management Federation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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. 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!

More Related