building from bedrock tailoring technology to collaboration
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Building from Bedrock: Tailoring Technology to Collaboration

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 29

Building from Bedrock: Tailoring Technology to Collaboration - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 143 Views
  • Uploaded on

Building from Bedrock: Tailoring Technology to Collaboration. Topics. Updates on the bedrock Internet identity InCommon today InCommon the next twelve months Collaboration Management Platforms Virtual Organizations and their IdM and access control needs Building from Bedrock

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Building from Bedrock: Tailoring Technology to Collaboration ' - hertz


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
topics
Topics
  • Updates on the bedrock
    • Internet identity
    • InCommon today
    • InCommon the next twelve months
  • Collaboration Management Platforms
  • Virtual Organizations and their IdM and access control needs
  • Building from Bedrock
    • The activities
    • The early lessons
    • Next steps
in the last few years
In the last few years…
  • Internet identity has become pervasive, in two flavors
    • A rapidly growing, but still maturing federated identity infrastructure, particularly in the R&E sector globally.
    • A set of theoretically interoperable social identity providers serving large masses of social and low-risk applications
  • Federated uses vary by country and sector
    • In some countries, 100% of citizens, using for government, research, educational and other uses
    • In the US, R&E and extensive federal/state government use
    • Verticals (medical, real estate, etc) building federated corporate identities
where we headed
Where We Headed
  • The trust infrastructure
    • An international peering of SAML R&E federations, with common attributes and LOA, with some careful integration of other identity approaches (e.g. Social2SAML).
    • Privacy preserving real time interrealm authentication and attribute exchange across all applications
  • The collaboration/VO IdM overlay
    • Services that provide integrated VO identity and access management to both domain and collaboration apps
    • Leverages trust infrastructure, enterprise and VO attributes,etc
it is a work in progress
It is a work in progress
  • Still immature
    • Not all institutions are in a federation
    • Not all institutions populate all base-level attributes
    • User-managed attribute release beginning
  • Still gaps being worked
    • Non-web apps just getting standardized by IETF (GSSAPI enhancements, enabling federated SSH)
    • Interfederation
    • Social2SAML
incommon today
InCommon today
  • 200+universities, 350+total participants, growth still rapid
  • Traditional uses continue to grow:
      • Outsourced testing services, outsourced travel, access to software, access to licensed content, etc.
  • New uses bloom:
      • Access to wikis, shared services, cloud services, calendaring, command line apps, etc.
  • Certificate services:
      • You’ll come for the cheap SSL, you’ll stay for the personal certs – signing, encryptions, wireless
incommon the next year
InCommon – the next year
  • Growth and managing growth
  • Silver – higher levels of assurance
  • uApprove – end user attribute management
  • Personal certificates
    • Powerful old technology
    • Authentication, signed email, signed documents, encryption, etc.
  • Solidifying campus participation
collaboration management platforms
Collaboration Management Platforms
  • An integrated “collaboration identity management system”
    • Provides basic group and role management for a group of federated users
    • Plugs into federated infrastructure to permit automatic data management
  • A growing set of applications that derive their authentication and authorization needs from such external systems
    • Collaboration apps – wikis, lists, calendaring, netmeeting
    • Domain apps – instruments, databases, computers, storage
from the collaboration perspective
From the collaboration perspective

Scalable actions expected (or at least hoped for) in a CMP:

  • Create and delete/archive users, accounts, keys
  • Group management on an individual and CMP-wide scale
  • Permit or deny access control to wiki pages, calendars, computing resources, version control systems, domain apps, etc.
  • Domesticated applications to meet the needs of the VO
  • Usage reporting
  • Metering and throttling
cmp from the technical perspective
CMP from the technical perspective
  • A combination of enterprise tools refactored for VO’s
    • Shib, Grouper, Directories, etc
  • A person registry with automated life-cycle maintenance
    • Includes provisioning and deprovisioning
  • A place to create, maintain local attributes
    • Using Groups and Roles
  • A place to combine local and institutional attributes for access to applications
  • A place to push/pull attributes to domesticated applications
    • Collaboration apps – wikis, lists, net meetings, calendars, etc
    • Domain apps – SSH, Clusters, Grids, iRods, etc.
    • Attributes delivered via SAML, LDAP, X.509, etc
deployment options for a cmp
Deployment options for a CMP
  • Proprietary approaches – Google Apps, MS Live
  • Embedded in a portal or gateway
  • As a stand-alone platform, assembled from components, with application servers around it
  • In a cloud, with apps in the cloud
  • As a national service
    • Surfnet –
      • http://www.surfnet.nl/en/Thema/coin/Pages/Default.aspx
slide13

http://www.internet2.edu/comanage/

A set of replaceable modules: user console, person registry, Shibboleth IdP and SP, Grouper, provisioning and deprovisioning, etc.

A set of domesticated apps

A kit, not a VM or a service

Funded by an NSF-SDCI grant and Internet2

API developed for the platform now in use at LIGO

domesticated applications
Domesticated Applications

Wikis, Chats, Lists, Jabber, etc.

Drupal, Moodle, Sakai, etc

Audioconferencing and netmeeting

Ad hoc and group event calendaring

Sharepoint, Webex, Adobe Connect, etc

File sharing, drop boxes, etc

slide16
VO’s

Multi-institutional, usually multi-national collaborations

Frequently centered on unique instruments (e.g. CERN, Sloan), data repositories (e.g. medical records, economic data), etc

Examples:

  • hard sciences – LIGO, NEON, OOI, iPlant, GENI
  • social sciences and humanities - Bamboo, CLARIN

Use standard collaboration tools and domain tools, often in an integrated fashion

  • SSH to manage an instrument that populated a DB that a web browser accesses
general vo characteristics
General VO Characteristics

Cluster around distinctive resources – instruments, databases, computational resources, historical records, etc.

A VO is distinct from a general collaboration by formal roles, ownership of resources, real budgets, scholarly deliverables, accountability and audit requirements, etc.

International by nature

Less privilege crust than enterprises

Some VO’s are deep in science and less wide in outreach

Some are as much wide as deep

vo requirements for identity management
VO Requirements for Identity Management

Permit or deny access control to wiki pages, calendars, computing resources, version control systems, file sharing and drop boxes, etc

Add or remove people from groups

Create new subgroups, identify overlapping memberships, etc.

Add people to mailing lists, wikis, etc

Ad hoc calendaring

Create and delete/archive users, accounts, keys

Identify group membership on a given date

Usage reporting

more on the collaboration space
More on the collaboration space
  • How VO and Enterprise IdM differ
    • VO often have greater federation needs
    • VO generally built around unique data sets, instruments
    • VO often multi-institutional, multi-national
    • Enterprise IdM (usually) has a stronger LoA
    • Enterprise IdM (usually) have a stronger infrastructure
the bedrock grant
The “Bedrock” Grant
  • Building from Bedrock: Infrastructure Improvements for Collaboration and Science – an NSF OCI grant (Fall, 2010)
  • Focus on further developing and integrating tools to allow collaborations to operate efficiently in the IdM space
    • COmanage
    • Grouper
    • Shibboleth
  • Beginning the art of tailoring technology to collaboration

http://www.internet2.edu/bedrock/

the art of tailoring
The art of tailoring
  • Fitting identity and access management systems to collaborations
    • Serve both the collaboration and domain apps
    • Leverage and plumb into emergent federated identity infrastructure
  • Collaborations are like snowflakes – no two are alike. A big variety in the needs and styles of collaborations
  • Work with the collaboration to analyze their needs – for most, “gee, we never thought about things this way…”
engaged vo s
Engaged VO’s

LIGO – www.ligo.org - high profile international gravitional physics

iPlant – www.iplantcollaborative.org - comprehensive cyberinfrastructure for Plant Biology

Bamboo - http://projectbamboo.org/ - comprehensive cyberinfrastructure for Arts and Humanities

GENI – www.geni.net - NSF next generation Internet research

Earth Science Women’s Network http://www.sage.wisc.edu/eswn/ - international peer-mentoring for women in earth sciences

vo requirements distilled identity and access control
VO Requirements distilled:Identity and Access Control
  • Leverage federated identity
  • Use groups for primary access control – understandable to most
  • Integrate with campus processes (identity management, course memberships, citizenship and other attributes)
  • Emphasis on some unusual functions
    • Historical views of group memberships
    • Usage reporting for funders consumption
integration of identity and access control
Integration of identity and access control
  • Identity and access control (groups) need to integrate across three science environments
    • Command-line-managed instruments generate data feeds that populate data bases
    • Using web browsers, scientists access the database, mark events, set data feeds, etc.
    • Other communities come in through science gateways and portals
  • Federated identity and domestication of applications is needed
  • Automated provisioning and deprovisioning a big win
vo requirements applications
VO Requirements: Applications
  • Collaborative
    • Federated, Access controlled wikis
    • File shares and Drop Boxes
    • Lists, Chats, Ad hoc calendaring,
    • Netmeetings, Audioconferences, etc.
  • Domain
    • VO Databases
    • TeraGrid, Open Science Grid
    • Command line apps
single profile
Single Profile

As VO’s get more data-centric in nature, profiles are the automated way to match users with new data sources, and a simple access control mechanism

The controlled vocabulary/ontology aspects of profiles needs active management tools as well as storing the profiles and managing releases.

Some of the new NSF data nets are using multiple profiles; single profile is the next single sign-on….

VIVO is an important building block for answers here http://www.vivoweb.org/

tailoring dimensions 1
Tailoring dimensions - 1
  • Breadth of outreach
  • Depth of science
  • Size of the collaboration and capabilities of IT staff
  • Locus of collaborators
    • Global scheduling, availability of identities, etc.
tailoring dimensions 2
Tailoring dimensions - 2
  • Dataness of collaboration
  • Management style of collaboration
  • Nature of collaborators
    • Balance of tools, communicating styles, etc
  • Autonomy of collaborations
    • When to include vs federate
next steps
Next Steps
  • Enhanced collaboration management – prerequisites, thresholds, cross-application quotas, etc.
  • Continued domestication of applications, including non-web apps
  • Improved user interfaces – OpenSocial, etc
  • Integration with other international collaboration platforms
  • Directly plumbing into infrastructure
    • Class lists dynamically into VO permissions
    • Higher assurance authentication of secure applications
  • VAMP (VO Camp)
ad