Difference between revisions of "Authentication Protocols"
(→Context) |
(→Captive users and services) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
===Captive users and services=== | ===Captive users and services=== | ||
At MIT and at most corporations there is a pre-existing legal agreement that is signed by all users that applies to all services. | At MIT and at most corporations there is a pre-existing legal agreement that is signed by all users that applies to all services. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In such a closed system in makes sense to allow [[Single Log Out]] so that a user can close their connection and go home for the day. | ||
===Federated or Open systems of users and services=== | ===Federated or Open systems of users and services=== | ||
Revision as of 21:23, 11 July 2018
Contents
Full Title or Meme
A collection of Authentication protocols are compared and contrasted.
Context
Since Kerberos was released at MIT in 1999 as a means to allow Single Sign On by students and staff to the variety of systems available at the university, the combination of one user sign on to a variety of different services has been promoted as necessary in the variety of network services now available to users. There are two distinct cases and a wide range of intermediate cases that are addressed by authentication protocols:
Captive users and services
At MIT and at most corporations there is a pre-existing legal agreement that is signed by all users that applies to all services.
In such a closed system in makes sense to allow Single Log Out so that a user can close their connection and go home for the day.
