Skip to main content

Availability-First Approach


People in identity management appear to be busy discussing 'Security-First’ and ‘Convenience-First'.  We would like to say ‘Wait a minute! Those discussions could be valid only where citizens are given a means to get themselves somehow authenticated in the first place. Where it is not the case, there would be no ‘Security-First’ nor ‘Convenience-First'.

We believe that it is the obligation of democratic societies to provide citizens with identity authentication measures that are practicable in emergencies as well as in everyday life.

-    Can we presume that no citizens trapped in emergencies would ever lose any cards?

-    Can we presume that no citizens trapped in emergencies would ever be injured?

-    Can we presume that every citizen trapped in emergencies would ever be settled and calm?

Click the link for the full text.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Probabilistic Is Human Body, Not Pattern-Matching Algorithm

The probabilistic nature of biometrics comes from the unpredictably variable body features of living animals rather than imperfect algorithms of pattern matching; perfection of pattern matching algorithm would not affect the probabilistic nature of biometrics. Biometrics that measures the probabilistic body features does not escape False Rejection/False Non-Match/False Negative that inevitably comes with False Acceptance/False Match/False Positive.   Since it cannot escape FR/FNM/FN, biometrics cannot escape the dependence on a fallback measure, a default password/pincode in most cases, which brings the security to the level lower than a password/pincode-only authentication. And yet, so many people who need higher security are spending so much money for bringing security down. Click the link for more - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/negative-security-effect-biometrics-deployed-hitoshi-kokumai/

Expanded Password System to Complement FIDO2

2 is larger than 1 but is not necessarily stronger than 1, as two children could be overwhelmed by a grown-up. For a two-factor authentication to be really reliable, each factor should be reasonably secure and usable enough. On the other hand, ‘password-less’ authentication, however attractive it might sound, would only benefit bad guys as examined in the link page - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/removal-passwords-its-security-effect-hitoshi-kokumai/ People who offer a token as 'a factor' of two factor authentication schemes could all be viewed as our potential down-stream partners. Among them are the people who offer FIDO2-compatible solutions. Put together, we could come up with the two-factor authentications that are much more reliable than otherwise.

‘Authenticators’ and ‘Deployment of Authenticators’

There are not a few security professionals who wrongly mix up the layer of ‘authenticators’ with that of ‘deployment of authenticators’, talking as though the former and the latter were competing each other, for example, ‘Multi-Factor Authentication is better than a password’ and ‘ID federation is better than a password’. The password is an ‘authenticator’. So are the token and biometrics. Whereas MFA and ID federation like FIDO and Open ID are ‘deployment of the authenticators’ Expanded Password System is to be found on the layer of 'authenticator', while the likes of Open ID and FIDO are all to be found on the upper layer of 'deployment of authenticators' and, as such, the likes of Open ID and FIDO could naturally be our down-stream partners. There are also some people who wrongly allege that removing an authenticator should increase security.   They are plainly misguided as examined here – “Removal of Passwords and Its Security Effect” https://www.linke...