Future-Ready Identity and Access Management

The great unknown Most of the challenges we face with security, and IAM in particular, are based on the diversity of the systems that must be controlled, the complexity of the disparate solutions put in place to secure access to those diverse systems, and the constantly shifting landscape of users and the ways those users choose to access those systems. Every time a new system is introduced or a new access opportunity presents itself, we face a crossroads. On the one hand, we can do our very best to secure the new system or the new access method on its own, hopefully (emphasis on “hope”) with the ability to draw on existing security practices or technologies; or we can take a step back and redesign security across the board so that 3 everything, including the new player, is addressed as a unified whole. The second option is ideal yet entirely impractical, while the first option is the reality of the situation and the root of the problem. We don’t know what tomorrow will bring. We can’t redesign our security systems every time something new comes up. We can’t throw out existing investments and proven systems and practices simply because the new investment doesn’t “play nice” with them. So we’re left doing the best we can with the hand we’ve been dealt, but often that isn’t enough. Risk doesn’t go away simply because we’re trying hard. Compliance doesn’t rest because we have the best intentions. And users don’t forgive security-caused inefficiency simply because systems don’t play nicely with each other. In other words, the future is the great unknown and no one can afford to wait for the future to arrive before making critical IAM decisions. How we got here When thinking about futureready IAM, I like to look at and learn from the past. Let’s look at the tale of two platforms: Windows and Unix/Linux. Back when Unix was king and Linux was gaining ground, and when Windows NT was all the rage, the only way to secure those systems was by treating each server as an independent island. That meant from an IAM standpoint each user had a unique account, an independent authentication method and unique authorization. So, clearly, administration was a nightmare. To overcome the problem, the *NIX world pursued complex synchronization scenarios and nonsecure tools that made things slightly better, but only as long as everything remained constant. Unfortunately, this complex synchronization by the *NIX world, doesn"t support a future-ready IAM solution. In fact, it was wholly unequipped to address pending trends. Windows, on the other hand, took an entirely different approach. Rather than attempt to make the disjointed approach to IAM work, Microsoft took a step back and evaluated the right thing to do with an eye on the flexibility and scalability necessary to 4 address whatever the future would hold and consequently an opportunity to help influence the future. The result was Active Directory, a single source of authentication and authorization for all things in the Windows universe. And the rest, as they say, is history. The challenge of the day must be addressed quickly and with the tools available at the moment. Interestingly, the *NIX world soon embraced the concept of the unified directory for all servers and the thriving Active Directory bridge industry was born. Rather than create its own unified directory, *NIX chose instead to take advantage of what Microsoft had already done – future ready IAM at its best. The culprit in most IAM approaches that are rigid and not future-ready is the necessity that the challenge of the day must be addressed quickly and with the tools available at the moment. Keep in mind, the vast
Please complete the form to gain access to this content