Open Problems for Privacy Preservation in Identity Management

Abstract:

In Open Computing Environments, more and more applications are deployed as service. They provide services for users from different organizations. Resources are deployed different organizations or enterprises. Users could access them across organizational boundaries. To ensure the security of resources, users have to provide their identity information to be authorized correctly every time they access a new service. It raises the risk of privacy which identity information was transferred frequently. In this paper, we demonstrate the problem of privacy in Identity Management of open computing environments, discuss the risk of privacy.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 40-41)
• Pages: 652-656
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.40-41.652
• Online since: November 2010
• Authors: Zom Bo Fu, Jian Xin Wang, Lin Yang, Yuan Cao, Wei Xing Zhu
• Keywords: Federation, Identity Management, Privacy Preservation

References

[1] Bertino, E., Ferrari, E., and Squicciarini, A. Trust negotiations: concepts, systems, and languages. Computing in Science and, (2004), 27-34.

DOI: 10.1109/mcse.2004.22

[2] Bhargav-Spantzel, A., Camenisch, J., Gross, T., and D. User centricity: a taxonomy and open issues. DIM '06: Proceedings of the second ACM workshop on Digital identity management, ACM Press (2007), 1-10.

DOI: 10.1145/1179529.1179531

[3] Bhargav-Spantzel, A., Squicciarini, A., and E. Establishing and protecting digital identity in federation systems. Journal of Computer Security 14, 3 (2006), 269-300.

DOI: 10.3233/jcs-2006-14303

[4] Cameron, K. The laws of identity. Microsoft Corp, 2005. http: /www. ict-21. ch/ICT. SATW. CH/IMG/Kim_Cameron_Law_of_Identity. pdf.

[5] Cameron, K. Windows CardSpace and Identity Meta System. proceedings of Internet2, (2007).

[6] Cantor, S., Kemp, J., Philpott, R., et al. Assertions and Protocols for the OASIS Security Assertion Markup Language. Language, 2005, 1-86.

[7] Castelluccia, C., Cristofaro, E.D., and Perito, D. Private Information Disclosure from Web Searches. arxiv. org, (2010), 1-16.

[8] Eckersley, P. How Unique Is Your Web Browser? panopticlick. eff. org, 2010. http: /panopticlick. eff. org/browser-uniqueness. pdf.

[9] Goldwasser, S., Micali, S., and Rackoff, C. The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive proof systems. In Proceedings of the seventeenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. ACM, Providence, Rhode Island, United States, 1989, 291-304.

DOI: 10.1145/22145.22178

[10] Internet2. Shibboleth. https: /shibboleth. internet2. edu.

[11] Jøsang, A. and Pope, S. User centric identity management. AusCERT Asia Pacific Information Technology, (2005), 1-13.

[12] Kaler, C., Mcintosh, M., Goodner, M., and Nadalin, A. Web Services Federation Language (WS-Federation). OASIS Standard, 2007, 1-128.

[13] Merrels, J. SXIP identity. DIX: Digital Identity Exchange protocol. (2006).

[14] Michael, S. SSL Certificates In Use Today Aren't All Valid. Qualys, 2010. http: /www. esecurityplanet. com/features/article. php/3890171/SSL-Certificates-In-Use-Today-Arent-All-Valid. htm.

[15] Ruddy, M., Trevithick, P., Nadalin, T., and D. Higgins trust framework. Digital ID World '06, (2009).

[16] Samarati, P. Protecting Respondents ' Identities in Microdata Release. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data 13, 6 (2001), 1010-1027.

DOI: 10.1109/69.971193

[17] Winsborough, W., Seamons, K., and Jones, V. Automated trust negotiation. Proceedings DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition. DISCEX'00, (2000), 88-102.

DOI: 10.1109/discex.2000.824965