Friday, February 20, 2015

SPID and User Perspective about Privacy

In the last blog, I’ve introduced the Italian Digital Identity Initiative, called SPID (Sistema Pubblico Identit√† Digitali).

Technically, SPID will provide an Identity ecosystem for trusted digital identities based on a federated Identity Management system, where citizen can access to public administration (or private) online service using trusted credentials, with the goals to improve accessibility, trust and online security.

With SPID, from an user experience standpoint, when user attempts to access to a online service (Service Provider or Relying Party), he/she is redirect to a Identity Provider (IdP) for the authentication process.

The mechanism is based on SAMLv2 protocol, where the Service Provider (SP) initializes the process (SP-initiated-SSO), requiring an authentication assertion, with a specific level of assurance, to the Identity Provider. Based on user authentication the IdP releases an authentication assertion to the SP.

This approach introduces a potential issue about the user’s privacy, indeed the direct interaction between the SP and IdP, allow the IdP to trace the user transaction with online services, that is the IdP know which government service (or private services) they’re accessing. Considering that the Identity Providers will be, mainly, private companies, this can be a real threat to the user's privacy, which need to be addressed with appropriate regulations and technical solutions.

A possible approach to this problem, with the goal to mitigate user's privacy issue, is the Identity Hub model, which is used in other digital identity initiatives around the world, like Connect.Gov (US) and Gov.UK Verify (UK).

Connect.Gov, for example, acts as Hub and it’s in charge to manage the communication between customers, online agency applications and Identity Providers. "The service allows customers to establish their identity in a secure, privacy-enhancing manner, while also providing government agencies assurance of valid customer identification."

Monday, December 15, 2014

The Italian Digital Identity Initiative: SPID

Last week was published in the Gazzetta Ufficiale, the Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers (DPCM 24 ottobre 2014) about the regulations to implement the Italian Digital Identity Initiative, called "Sistema Pubblico di Identit√† Digitale" (SPID).

SPID is a set of credentials to access to the public administration online service, and also to private sector online service (i.e. e-commerce company) if they will adhere to the initiative.

SPID defines a Federated Identity Management system, based on SAMLv2 standard, where are involved Citizens, Service Providers (SP), Identity Providers (IdP), Attribute Providers(AA) and the Digital Agency for Italy, in the role of accreditation and registry authority.
The following picture describes a high level architecture and flow of  SPID-ready access to a online service.

  1. Access request.
  2. Redirect to Identity Provider.
  3. Credential request.
  4. Authentication.
  5. Redirect to the Service Provider with the Authentication Assertion (SAMLv2).
  6. Attributes request.
  7. Response with verified attributes.

Technical specification and interface (draft) are available here (Italian).



Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Protecting Personal Data in an IoT Network with UMA

Digital technologies are changing the game of customer interactions, with new rules and possibilities that ware unimaginable only a view years back.
Networked devices and sensors make up the fabric of the Internet of Things (IoT). Leveraging mobile devices, sensors, and wearables is the future of identity and personal data.
The risk about the use of personal data is the lose of trust between individual and organization.
"Fully 78% of consumers think it is hard to trust companies when it comes to use of their personal data.” 
Orange, The Future of Digital Trust, 2014

For balancing between individuals privacy and unlock innovation through the new digital technologies is needed a new approach to protect personal data.
The Word Economic Forum has provided an interesting report about "Rethinking Personal Data: A New Lens for Strengthening Trust" to address this requirement.

IoT complexity

The nature and the complexity of IoT environment is opening interesting discussion about how the authorization and access control mechanisms can be applied to this context. 
In respect of the classic definition of authorization process, which is a process for granting approval to a system entity to access a system resource, in IoT environment we have to consider different aspects and complexities (not exhaustive): limited resources, decentralized and distributed network,  relationship between objects and ownership. 
In order to proof how UMA (User-Managed Access) can be suitable to address specific IoT requirements we propose a healthcare scenario, which is, for his nature, well known for strong presence of Internet of Things (medical devices), and it combines interesting security and privacy aspects related to patient’s data.

Patient-Centric Use Case

The following diagram represents a healthcare scenario related to a patient-centric use case.
The doctor (Bob) is a user of Patient Monitor (Resource Server). The patient (Alice) uses is bedside remote as a Client to access to the Patient Monitor. Bob’s electronic stethoscope is a intelligence thing owned by Bob that can be temporarily paired with the patient monitor with Alice’s authorization. For safety, Bob’s stethoscope also has an RFID chip as a proximity sensor (Dump Thing).



Security and Privacy Goals

The following diagrams describes the security domains across the whole authorization process and  the actors involved in each domain, including IoT.

In the scenario, UMA provides the fundamental capabilities to prevent unauthorized things connection to the Resource Server (Patient Monitor), and allow to the patient to control and get visibility for authorising and share healthcare data.


For more details about the use case and UMA approach, please see the slideshare presentation (below), shown at Kantara Initiative Workshop at Dublin the 3rd of November 2014.




Thursday, July 10, 2014

Enterprise Mobility: Secure Containerization


Last week, I've presented at the event “Small Device - Big Data: sicurezza in un mondo senza fili” organized by
department of Computer Science of the Sapienza University of Rome, related to the Master in Information Security.

My speech was about the enterprise mobility and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) paradigm. I’ve introduced the new challenges related the enterprise mobility, the risks associate with devices mobile and the new security requirements that the enterprise needs to address, including the main aspects of the secure containerization: application wrapping, secure communication, encryption at rest and Data Leakage prevention (See slideshare presentation below).









Monday, June 23, 2014

User-Managed Access awarded 2014 Best Innovation in Information Security

I'm happy to announce that User-Managed Access (UMA) has won the 2014 Best Innovation/New Standard in Information Security award from the European Identity & Cloud Conference (EIC). More details about the award are available at Kantara press release page.
After almost a year since I've published a blog post about how UMA can be applied to the Life Management Platforms (LMPs) concept, last May, I presented, along with Maciej Machulak, Vice-chair at UMA WG (on the right in the picture below), this approach at the European Identity and Cloud Conference (EIC) 2014, in the track session "Standards for an Open Life Management Infrastructure", with the title "User-Managed Access: key to Life Management Platforms".
During the session, we have given a complete vision and an architectural approach how UMA fits very well with the new emerging trends related to Personal Clouds and in particularly to LMPs, as authorisation system for online personal data sharing model (see slideshare below).

I'm very happy for helping the UMA WG to receive the award!




Thursday, June 6, 2013

User-Managed Access for Life Management Platforms

The concept of Life Management Platform (LMP) was introduced last year in the Kupping-Cole's advisory note "Life Management Platforms: Control and Privacy for Personal Data".
The platform concept provides the tools to manage the essential information of every person’s life and making it usable for other parties through privacy-enhanced applications, thus meeting the privacy and security requirements.
LMP is about Personal Information Sharing which is an emerging trend for online personal daily life activities, including the interaction with financial credit, insurance, healthcare, etc..
Very similar to concepts like Personal Cloud, or Personal Data Store (PDS), LMP encourages the individual to control own data and for some aspects close to a Vendor Relationship Management (VRM) vision.

The key features of this new concept includes:
  • Secure store of the information
  • Granular access control for data
  • Information control remains with individual
  • Informed Pull and Controlled Push mechanisms for sharing data (see details below)
In the "Take Control of your Personal Data: An UMA perspective" blog post, I've explained how UMA protocol (also see the UMA spec) addresses the individual's privacy requirements in today's data sharing challenges, that includes social network, personal data store, personal cloud and emerging participatory data store.
UMA defines how an individual can control protected-resource access by clients operated by arbitrary requesting parties, where the resource reside on any number of resource servers, and where a centralized authorization server governs access based on individual policy.
For this features, I think that UMA protocol, which is a OAuth profile, is well suitable to be part of Life Management Platform for managing Privacy and Security requirements. (Also see the UMA case study on “subscribing to a friend’s personal cloud”.)
To give you an idea of this approach, the following diagram shows a possible (high level) LMP architecture integrated with UMA protocol. 

  • The individual (the resource owner) interacts with the LMP for managing own data.
  • LMP acts as Resource Server for the individual's data, protected by the UMA Authorization Server (AS).
  • UMA Authorization Server acts as centralized policy decision point where the individual control the authorization of data sharing and service access.
  • Clients act as data producer and data consumer respectively for "Informed Pull" and "Controlled Push" scenarios.
Apart of secure store of the information which is a specific feature of the platform, the others key features could be aspects of UMA features.
In LMP scenarios, an individual interacts for sharing life data with parties through two specific way:
  1. Informed Pull - LMP allows to consume information from other parties (i.e an individual issues a request for information to a group of banks to obtain the best offer for a personal loan).
  2. Controlled Push - LMP is a producer of individual data for other parties (i.e. an individual requestes access to a online insurance service to buy a car insurance, providing personal information and car details).
In the Informed Pull scenario, UMA AS is able to provide a LMP Consumer API protection, forcing the client to be authorized before that the LMP consumes the data published by the client on behalf of a Subject (i.e. a loan offer provided by a bank).

In the Controlled Push scenario, UMA AS is able to provide a control about how personal information will be disseminate with which parties in order to access to online service. 
In this case, the authorization process starts when the client on behalf of the requesting party (i.e the insurance company) requests access to individual data which are stored or produced by the LMP.

The authorization process is based on UMA Connection concept (see details about UMA Connection concept here), by which the client must be identified and invited to negotiate the individual's access policies (they may include trusted claims, individual terms and constraints).

The following picture shows an example of user interface where is visible the two approaches for managing life connections and life events respectively for Controlled Pull and Informed Push models.


Benefits of UMA approach for LMPs:
  • Inspired by Privacy By Design concept.
  • Built on top of OAuth v2 specification.
  • Provide a centralized and granular access control system.
  • Interoperable with trusted ecosystems.
UMA Implementations 
There are several active UMA implementations in different space of the data sharing models, including Personal Data Store, Life Management Platforms and at enterprise level. For more details refer to UMA Implementations page.



Thursday, March 7, 2013

A theoretical approach to the Right to be forgotten

Imagine a world where individuals can share personal information online with the possibility to control where the information are located, track all the copies of information derived, managing the right to request removal of data and effecting the erasure of removal of all exact or deviated copies of the items. This is called "right to be forgotten".

The right to be forgotten is included in the proposed regulation on data protection published by the European Commission in January 2012.

Despite the debates about this topic, related to the fact that in an open system like internet, the right to be forgotten cannot be enforced by technical means alone (see ENISA report about Right to be forgotten), I would like to demonstrate a theoretical model to address this regulation.
The model is inspired by the "Chain-link confidentiality approach" which can realistically be applied to the User-Managed Access (UMA) protocol.

A chain-link confidentiality regime would contractually link the disclosure of personal information to obligations to protect that information as the information moves downstream.The system would focus on the relationships not only between the discloser of information and the initial recipient, but also between the initial recipient and subsequent recipients.

UMA defines how resource owners (an individual) can control protected-resource (personal information) access by clients operated by arbitrary requesting parties (the recipients), where the resources reside on any number of resource servers (the provider of the personal information), and where a centralized authorization server governs access based on resource owner policy.

Applying Chain-link confidentiality approach to UMA, means to enforce the requester (client) to be itself a protected resource. The result is that the Client becomes a resource server for any personal information derived from the initial recipient (resource server), creating a chain of protection.
The assumption here is that the personal information at each chain node are exposed as web resource.

As result, an individual has the possibility to control where information are stored at the initial recipient, and track all the copies of information derived from it, following the chain of protection.
Through the UMA's Authorization Server, an individual has the possibility to manage the right to remove data from the resource servers, and delete any relationship with them.

The diagram below show how the proposed model addresses the complexity to represent the relationships and the control on the individual’s personal information distributed among different initial recipients and subsequent recipients. In the example is showed (in dotted line) a chain of protection, where the Bank (resource server) is the initial recipient for bank account information, and the Employer and the Loan Service are requesting parties as subsequent recipients which become protected resources.