Posted 3:39 PM (0) comments

Lookin' for a date honey?

Ever use an escort service in Vegas? Or think about it? Better read Matt Flynn's blog entry for today :)

Labels: security

Posted 9:01 AM (2) comments

Cisco gets entitled - updated

Cisco Systems announced this morning a definitive agreement to acquire entitlement management leader Securent, Inc.

I've disagreed with Securent CEO Rajiv Gupta on some issues, notably the use of role management in identity and entitlement systems, but I can't disagree about this move - it makes a good deal of sense from Securent's perspective.

Entitlements, usually linked to applications and the rights and privileges users have within those applications (as opposed to standard operating system rights to access the application), should also be linked to the field of Network Access Control - NAC (which Cisco calls Network Admission Control). From that point of view its also a good move on Cisco's part.

Whether or not it advances Identity Management at all, though, is open to question. Cisco, certainly, has a view of identity that's very much at odds with other major technology vendors. As a hardware company, it tends to focus on the platform, not the user. It's important to remember that all those "things" in the network have identity, but not at the expense of the people using those things. By the same token, Securent might be thought of as focusing too narrowly on the rules and not seeing the users who the rules are built to support.

I don't think this signals a round of acquisition activity for entitlement management companies, but only time will tell about that. In the meantime, keep working on your Role Management rollout.

UPDATE: As someone pointed out to me, Securent will join Cisco's "Collaboration Software Group" which, as far as I can tell, is the group responsible for WebEx and not much else. The group is headed by Don Proctor, formerly Senior Vice President of the Voice Technology Group, a remarkably unsuccessful branch of the networking powerhouse. In looking around the Cisco web site, in fact, they seem more of a candidate to become a Securent client rather than an acquirer - unless John Thompson Chambers (thanks, Ian!) wants to keep the technology all to himself!

Labels: acquisition, entitlement, roles, security

Posted 9:12 AM (2) comments

PKI, PKU, PK-HeSheIt

Gerry Goebel has a good, short story illustrating why PKI has never caught on, and never will.

Labels: Burton, PKI, security

Posted 8:22 AM (0) comments

Where's my data?

Dale Olds had an interesting post today ("The physical location of data matters") and Vikram Kumar had an interesting commentary ("Data location matters").

Dale states his thesis:

"The problem is that there can be very subtle problems in these systems based on where a policy is actually stored, who can access the policy, what is the security for retrieving the policy, etc.

And the slogan sounds very silly. It is 'the physical location of the data matters'."

And Kumar injects that:

"For many non-Americans top of mind when they think about the physical location of their data is the USA Patriot Act. This law presents two particularly thorny issues regarding their data stored in the US."

We sometimes lose sight of these issues as we strive to make data access as seamless as possible. From the beginnings of the virtual directory a dozen years ago to today's meshed software and mashed up services, the actual location of the data doesn't matter to the operation, to the transaction, to the application, to the service. But it terms of security and privacy (and even intellectual property) it might make a great deal of difference where the actual data resides.

Something to take into consideration.

Labels: digital identity, security, virtual directory