This post provides a brief survey of existing SSO solutions including Ping Identity's PingFederate, Microsoft's Azure Access Control Service, CA CloudMinder Single Sign-On, and Intel Cloud SSO (beta).
Note: Most information used in this posted are originated from the publicly available reference materials listed in “References” section and my personal evaluation of the products. If you found me misinterpreting these materials, or if I’ve missed some supported features (i.e. the ones marked with question marks), please let me know via comments! I’ll update the post accordingly.
API Security
As more and more services are orchestrated under SOA, more and more services are consumed by other services instead of directly invoked by human actions. Supporting API security is a very important feature for a SSO solution to succeed on cloud.
| RESTful | STS | AD | Certificate | Form | SDK | |
| CA | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | Yes |
| Intel* | ESG* | ESG* | ESG* | ESG* | Yes | ? |
| Microsoft | OAuth | ws-Trust | ADFS | x.509 | Yes | Yes |
| Ping* | OAuth | ws-Trust | LDAP | x.509 | ? | Yes |
*Both Intel and Ping provide out-of-box support of a list of popular cloud-based services such as Force.com, Google Apps, and Office 365.
*It seems API security is supported by Intel via a different product, Expressway Service Gateway.
In addition, both Microsoft and Ping Identity provides extensive support of claim-based architecture via Microsoft WIF. Claim-based architecture with WIF shields service providers from most complicities of authentication and authorization while providing maximum flexibility to federate with one ore more trusted identity providers. In my opinion, this is THE way authentication/authorization should be done for most service providers.
Automated Provisioning
There are two types of automatic provisioning: JIT provisioning or SaaS provisioning.
In a JIT (Just-in-time) provisioning solution, a service provider automatically provisions/updates a user based on incoming assertions. Note in this model, there’s an explicit trust of the IdP from SP, but the IdP can remain agnostic to the SP (of course an explicit trust may exist at security protocol level).
On the other hand, in a SaaS provisioning solution, identities are replicated from trusted IdPs to SP’s local user store so that the SP can authenticate users just as it commonly does without knowing the IdP. Note that in this model, an explicit replication exists between the IdP and the SP, but SP can remain agnostic to the IdP.
|
| JIT Provisioning | SaaS Provisioning |
| CA | FedMinder+IdentityMinder | ? |
| Intel | ? | Through ECA 360 integration |
| Microsoft | None | None |
| Ping Identity | PingFederate | PingFederate+PingConnect |
Multi-factor Authentication
Mutli-factor authentication, as the name suggests, requires users to log in using more than one set of credentials. A popular multi-factor authentication technique is the usage of software OTP (one time password) in addition to existing authentication mechanisms. OTP is usually delivered via specialized hardware, or via applications that run on mobile devices such as smart phones.
| Built-in support | OTP | Mobile devices | |
| CA | Yes | CA ArcotOTP | Yes |
| Intel | Yes | Chip support | Yes (Nordic) |
| Microsoft | No* | No | N/A |
| Ping | ? | ? | ? |
Centralized Management
Centralized provides an unified view of identities across multiple identity providers as well as identify usages across multiple service providers. Common functionalities of such portals include user provisioning, profile management, trust configuration, usage monitoring etc. Some portals (such as IdentityMinder) provides additional workflow integration such as supporting access request-approval.
On the other hand, some solutions provides self-service model, where user can perform some identity management tasks, such as re
| User Management Online Portal | Self-service Portal | |
| CA | IdentityMinder | ? |
| Intel | Cloud SSO Portal | ? |
| Microsoft | Azure Portal* | ? |
| Ping | ? | ? |
*Azure portal emphasize on federation management instead of user management.
Monitoring, Auditing and Compliance
| Auditing/Logging | Compliance enforcement | Other | |
| CA | ? | ? | Risk management with RiskMinder |
| Intel | ? | Cloud SSO Portal? | |
| Microsoft | WIF tracing | ? | |
| Ping | CEF ArcSight’s ETRM Database | ? |
Hosting
One of important feature of a robust SSO solution is high availability. Obviously loosing the authentication/authorization service renders all relying services unavailable. And for a multi-tenant solution, it has to be able to handle workloads from all connected parties so it doesn’t become a performance bottleneck.
| On-premise | On-cloud | |
| CA | CA products | Hosted by CA |
| Intel | Intel ECA 360 | Hosted by Salesforce? |
| Microsoft | Local STS | Hosted by Microsoft |
| Ping | PingFederate | ? |
Other
Some characteristics are shared among all surveyed providers, including embracing industrial standards such as SAML and ws-Federation, extensibility, and mobile support. This post doesn’t compare these aspects in future details.