from human minds to effect. Such
processes are inherently inexact. Consequently, the more complex the
environment, the higher is the chance that security holes have been included.
The primary
function of an identification system is to contribute to the trust model of the
system by supporting the authentication of the identity of the individual
persons or other relevant entities registered in, or recognizable by, the
system. The document Special Publication 800-36: Guide to Selecting
Information Technology Security Products, issued by the National Institute
for Standards and Technology of the United States Department of Commerce,
suggests three ways that authentication can be accomplished: through provision
by users of something that they have (e.g. a token), through provision by users
of something that they alone know (e.g. a password) or through sampling a
personal characteristic of the user (e.g. a fingerprint). Each of these
approaches essentially calls for the provision of a marker on the part of the
supplicant and the assessment of that marker regarding establishing the
identity of the supplicant by the sentinel. Each form of authentication is accomplished
by slightly different protocols. However, essentially all of these protocols
consist of qualitatively similar procedures. We characterize these procedures
as five successive stages.
The first stage
we term the overture. As with a play, this stage is the prelude to the
main action. It entails bringing the supplicant and the sentinel into close
proximity such that they both decide that they wish to enter into the
authentication protocol proper. The actions that occur during the overture
indicate that either side can first take the initiative in the process. The
sentinel may first notice the approach of the supplicant and issue a
preliminary challenge: “Halt, who goes there?” Alternatively, the supplicant
can take the initiative: “Hello the house!” Following this very preliminary
exchange, the sentinel can begin the formal authentication procedure; “Advance
and be recognized!” The supplicant then responds with an initial assertion; “I’m
Jane Doe.”
In essence, we’ve
slightly codified an exchange that might occur between two strangers meeting in
an isolated location where the intentions of either can range from benign to
threatening. In establishing some level of general transaction etiquette, this
corresponds to the range of actions from a person’s personal electronic device
addressing an apparently dormant system and issuing an invitation for the
supplicant to “Type your username” or “Insert your token.” We’ve gone a bit
overboard in discussing the overture stage because this is an area where
operational models of different systems can diverge rather significantly; so,
it is useful to model this well such that the two parties can land on their
feet no matter how they got started.
The remaining
stages are typically understood in a generic sense, but they can vary a great
deal in the details. Once a name of the supplicant is asserted during the
overture, then the next stage is marker acquisition from
the supplicant and providing it to the sentinel. The only real new wrinkle
here, from a conceptualization viewpoint, is recognizing that these successive
stages may be pursued recursively, i.e. at multiple levels, in order to achieve
an adequate trust level among all the elements of the two systems; i.e. first
recognizing trusted equipment and then establishing trust in the identity of
the supplicant. This is particularly important during the marker acquisition
stage because, for most current identification systems, this will require the
supplicant to trust the sensors of the sentinel through which the marker is
acquired.
Once the marker
is acquired, the next stage is marker verification, a processing step
performed by the sentinel to a marker template that was gathered from the
supplicant on enrollment into the identification system under whose trust
auspices this interaction is taking place.
|