DOCSLIB.ORG

An Overview of Cloud Identity Management-Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Overview of Cloud Identity Management-Models An Overview of Cloud Identity Management-Models Bernd Zwattendorfer, Thomas Zefferer and Klaus Stranacher Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications (IAIK), Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 16a, 8010 Graz, Austria fbernd.zwattendorfer, thomas.zefferer, [email protected] Keywords: Cloud, Cloud Computing, Cloud Identity Management-Model, Identity Management Abstract: Unique identification and secure authentication are essential processes in various areas of application, e.g. in e-Government, e-Health, or e-Business. During the past years several identity management-systems and models have evolved. Many organizations and enterprises or even countries for their national eID solutions rely on identity management-systems for securing their applications. Since more and more applications are migrated into the cloud, secure identification and authentication are also vital in the cloud domain. How- ever, cloud identity management-systems need to meet slightly different requirements than traditional identity management-systems and thus cannot be clustered into the same model types or categories. Therefore, in this paper we give an overview of different cloud identity management-models that have already emerged up to now. We further compare these models based on selected criteria, e.g. on practicability and privacy aspects. 1 INTRODUCTION cloud computing is the loss of data protection and privacy (Pearson and Benameur, 2010), (Zissis and Secure and reliable identity management (IdM) plays Lekkas, 2012), and (Sen, 2013). a vital role in several security-sensitive areas of ap- The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 plications, e.g. in e-Government, e-Business, or classifies existing traditional identity management- e-Health. An identity management-system helps models and their implementations. Section 3 surveys online applications to control access for users to existing cloud identity management-models and de- protected resources or services. However, identity scribes their benefits and drawbacks. These models management is no new topic and several identity are compared in Section 4 based on selected criteria. management-approaches and systems have already Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section 5. emerged over time. A comprehensive overview on identity management-systems is given in (Bauer et al., 2005). Due to the increasing number of cloud comput- 2 TRADITIONAL IDENTITY ing adoption and the deployment of security-sensitive MANAGEMENT-MODELS cloud applications, secure identity management be- comes also more and more important in the cloud do- An identity management-system usually involves four main. In addition, outsourcing identity management- entities (Bertino and Takahashi, 2011). A service systems to the cloud can bring up several benefits provider (SP) provides different online services to such as higher scalability or cost savings, since no users. Before being allowed to consume such ser- in-house infrastructure needs to be hosted and main- vices, a user has to successfully identify and authen- tained. However, the field of cloud identity manage- ticate. Therefore, the user usually identifies and au- ment is still new and not extensively investigated yet. thenticates at a so-called identity provider (IdP). The Therefore, the aim of this paper is to overview dif- identity provider is then in charge of providing the ferent cloud identity management-models, discuss ad- users identity data and supplementary authentication vantages and disadvantages of the individual models, results to the service provider in a secure way. Fi- provide a comprehensive survey, and finally compare nally, a control party, which is usually a law or regula- them based on selected criteria. The criteria for the tion enforcing body, needs to investigate identity data comparison have been selected by focusing on practi- transactions, e.g. for data protection reasons. Hence, cability and privacy, since one of the main issues of main purpose of such control party is auditing. Figure 1 illustrates the communication process in an identity 2.2 Central Model management-system including all four entities. The central identity model avoids diverse identity management-systems, where the user has to register separately. Instead, the identity management-system is outsourced by several service providers to a central identity provider. The identity provider takes over all identity-related functionality for the service provider, including credential issuance, identification and au- thentication, and the management of the identity life- cycle in general (Bertino and Takahashi, 2011). Fur- thermore, in this model users’ identity data are stored in a central repository at the identity provider and ser- vice providers do not need to maintain identity data in their own repositories (Cao and Yang, 2010). For authentication at a service provider, the user has to identify and authenticate at the identity provider be- fore. The identity provider then assembles a token Figure 1: Entities involved in an identity management- including all necessary identity and authentication in- system formation of the user and transmits it to the service provider1. (Jøsang et al., 2005) further distinguish the Over time, several identity models involving these domain model for the identifier used. In the common four entities and supporting similar but slightly dif- identifier model one and the same identifier is used ferent use cases have evolved. Some of these mod- for identification at all service providers. In contrast els have advantages in scalability, others in privacy or to that, in the meta identifier domain model separate user control. In the following subsections we briefly identifiers are used for identification at the individ- describe the most important models based on the work ual service providers. However, all separate identi- of (Cao and Yang, 2010), (Dabrowski and Pacyna, fiers map to a common meta identifier at the identity 2008), (Dbrowski and Pacyna, 2008), (Jøsang et al., provider to uniquely identify the user. Typical exam- 2005), (Jøsang and Pope, 2005), (Jøsang et al., 2007), ples implementing this approach are Kerberos (Neu- and (Palfrey and Gasser, 2007). For simplicity, we man et al., 2005) or the Central Authentication Ser- skip a discussion of the control party in all subsequent vice (CAS)2. models because its functionality remains the same in all models. 2.3 User-Centric Model 2.1 Isolated Model While in the central model all identity data of the user The isolated model is basically the simplest tradi- are stored in the domain of the identity provider, in the user-centric model tional identity model. In this model, the service all identity data are stored directly provider and identity provider merge, hence identi- in the users domain, e.g. on a secure token such as a fication and authentication are directly carried out at smart card. The main advantage of this model is that the service provider. In addition, the functionality of the user always remains the owner of her identity data the identity management-system (creating, maintain- and stays under their full control (Dbrowski and Pa- ing, or deleting identities) can only be used by this cyna, 2008). Identity data can only be transferred by specific service provider. If a user wants to access ser- an identity provider to a service provider if the user vices of another service provider, she needs to register explicitly gives her consent to do so. Compared to at the other service providers identity management- the central model, this tremendously increases users’ system again. This further means that each individual privacy. (Jøsang and Pope, 2005) discuss in detail this user-centric approach. Typical examples imple- service provider has to store and maintain the identity 3 data and credentials of the user separately. While this menting this model are Windows CardSpace or var- still may not be a huge burden for service providers, 1Different approaches exist; hence identity data can be the diversity of credentials for accessing various ser- either pushed to or pulled from the service provider. vice providers may become unmanageable for users 2http://www.jasig.org/cas (Jøsang and Pope, 2005). This model can still be 3http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ found by service providers on the Internet. vstudio/ms733090\%28v\=vs.90\%29.aspx ious national eID solutions such as the Austrian cit- 3.1 Identity in the Cloud-Model izen card (Leitold et al., 2002) or the German eID (Frommm and Hoepner, 2011). The Identity in the Cloud-Model is similar to the iso- lated identity model described in Section 2.1. Again, 2.4 Federated Model identity provider and service provider merge also in this model. This means for the cloud case that the In the federated model identity data are not stored in cloud service provider, which hosts the application, is a central repository but are rather stored distributed also responsible for the identity management. Figure across different identity and/or service providers. No 2 illustrates this model. single entity is fully controlling the identity informa- tion (Palfrey and Gasser, 2007). The distributed iden- tity data of a particular user are linked usually by the help of a common identifier4. All identity providers and service providers, which take part in such a fed- eration, share a common trust relationship amongst each other. The trust relationship is usually estab- lished on organizational level whereas enforcement is carried out on technical level. This
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Is an Identity Provider? Why Does My Company Need to Become One?
    WHITE PAPER WHAT IS AN IDENTITY PROVIDER? WHY DOES MY COMPANY NEED TO BECOME ONE? Tame Mobile and Cloud Security Risks: Become an IdP Executive Overview Enterprises face security threats from all directions. According to the Identity Theft Resource Center, there were 189 known breaches from January 1 of this year through the beginning of June. Those breaches exposed approximately 13.7 million records. Meanwhile, trends intended to benefit the enterprise, such as cloud computing and mobility, often introduce unintended risks. The weak link in our online economy is trust. If you boil that down further, much of the lack of trust stems from the inability to verify online identities. It is increasingly difficult to know whether people (or companies) on the Internet are who they say they are. To address today’s security risks and to embrace new technology trends such as cloud, mobility and SaaS, enterprises must rethink how they handled their employees’ identities. Fortunately, the industry has been moving towards federated Single Sign On (SSO) solutions, and has been standardizing building blocks like SAML and OpenID. Enterprises should build on these standards in order to become Identity Providers (IdP). By becoming an IdP, companies can better control, enforce and extend security standards to all on-premise and cloud-based applications in their organizations, as well as to mobile devices. This paper will discuss the reasons enterprises should become IdPs, what becoming an IdP involves, and why you should automate as much of this process as possible. Introduction: New Security Risks Undermine Online Business In August 2012, a hacker crafted a wickedly specific social engineering attack to target Wired writer Mat Honan.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond X.509: Token-Based Authentication and Authorization for HEP
    Beyond X.509: Token-based Authentication and Authorization for HEP Andrea Ceccanti, Marco Caberletti, Enrico Vianello, Francesco Giacomini INFN CNAF CHEP 2018 Sofia, July 12th 2018 The current WLCG AAI In operation since ~2003, and still working nicely: • X.509 trust fabric provided by IGTF (tells services which CAs are trusted) • X.509 certificates provided to users for authentication • Proxy certificates for Single Sign-On (SSO) and delegation • VOMS attribute certificates for attribute-based authorization (issued and Slide by Ákos Frohner signed by VO-scoped VOMS servers) Beyond X.509: Token-based Authentication & Authorization for HEP - CHEP 2018, Sofia 2 Current WLCG AAI: the weak points Usability • X.509 certificates are difficult to handle for users • VOMS does not work in browsers Inflexible authentication • Only one authentication mechanism supported: X.509 certificates • Hard to integrate identity federations Authorization tightly bound to authentication mechanism • VOMS attributes are inherently linked to an X.509 certificate subject Ad-hoc solution • We had to invent our own standard and develop ad-hoc libraries and central services to implement our own AAI Can we do better today? Beyond X.509: Token-based Authentication & Authorization for HEP - CHEP 2018, Sofia 3 A novel AAI for WLCG: main challenges Authentication Delegation • Flexible, able to accomodate • Provide the ability for services to various authentication mechanisms act on behalf of users - X.509, username & password, • Support for long-running EduGAIN, social logins
    [Show full text]
  • Identity Provider for SAP Single Sign-On and SAP Identity Management Document Version: 1.0 – 2017-05-15
    Implementation Guide PUBLIC Identity Provider for SAP Single Sign-On and SAP Identity Management Document Version: 1.0 – 2017-05-15 Identity Provider for SAP Single Sign-On and SAP Identity Management Content 1 Identity Provider for SAP Single Sign-On and SAP Identity Management....................4 1.1 What is SAML 2.0............................................................... 5 SSO with SAML 2.0........................................................... 6 SLO with SAML 2.0............................................................9 Identity Federation...........................................................10 Common Domain and Identity Provider Discovery.....................................14 Identity Provider Proxy........................................................16 1.2 Before Starting................................................................23 System Requirements........................................................ 23 Authorizations..............................................................24 Limitations of the Identity Provider................................................25 1.3 Adding an Identity Provider to Your Network...........................................26 Downloading and Installing the Federation Software................................... 26 Configuring the Identity Provider.................................................27 Enabling the SAML Identity Provider.............................................. 29 Configuring Back-Channel Communication..........................................31 Configuring
    [Show full text]
  • Securing Digital Identities in the Cloud by Selecting an Apposite Federated Identity Management from SAML, Oauth and Openid Connect
    Securing Digital Identities in the Cloud by Selecting an Apposite Federated Identity Management from SAML, OAuth and OpenID Connect Nitin Naik and Paul Jenkins Defence School of Communications and Information Systems Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Abstract—Access to computer systems and the information this sensitive data over insecure channels poses a significant held on them, be it commercially or personally sensitive, is security and privacy risk. This risk can be mitigated by using naturally, strictly controlled by both legal and technical security the Federated Identity Management (FIdM) standard adopted measures. One such method is digital identity, which is used to authenticate and authorize users to provide access to IT in the cloud environment. Federated identity links and employs infrastructure to perform official, financial or sensitive operations users’ digital identities across several identity management within organisations. However, transmitting and sharing this systems [1], [2]. FIdM defines a unified set of policies and sensitive information with other organisations over insecure procedures allowing identity management information to be channels always poses a significant security and privacy risk. An transportable from one security domain to another [3], [4]. example of an effective solution to this problem is the Federated Identity Management (FIdM) standard adopted in the cloud Thus, a user accessing data/resources on one secure system environment. The FIdM standard is used to authenticate and could then access data/resources from another secure system authorize users across multiple organisations to obtain access without both systems needing individual identities for the to their networks and resources without transmitting sensitive single user.
    [Show full text]
  • From Identity-Based Authorization to Capabilities: Scitokens, Jwts, And
    From Identity-Based Authorization to Capabilities: SciTokens, JWTs, and OAuth Jim Basney [email protected] HTCondor Workshop Autumn 2020 25 September 2020 Goals for an HTC Authorization System ● Enable access to HTC! ● Implement appropriate resource/data access policies ● Ease of use ● Manageability ● Distributed/Decentralized 2 Authentication & Authorization Standards ● X.509: Certificates ○ Grid Security Infrastructure (GSI) ○ Virtual Organization Membership Service (VOMS) ● SAML: Security Assertion Markup Language ○ Using XML ○ Single Sign-on for Higher Education: eduGAIN / InCommon / Shibboleth ● JWT: JSON Web Tokens ○ Using JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) ○ Pronounced "jot" ○ Digitally signed, self-describing security tokens ● OAuth: Authorization Framework ○ Optionally using JWTs ○ Tokens for limited access to resources ● OIDC: OpenID Connect ○ An identity layer on top of OAuth ○ Using JWTs 3 X.509 Certificate Attribute Authority Authority Policy Policy Trust End Entity Attribute Certificate Certificate Data Node Submit Execute Policy Node Node Policy Policy 4 SAML Identity Provider Policy Trust Authentication Attribute Assertion Assertion Data Node Submit Execute Policy Node Node Policy Policy 5 JWT / OIDC / OAuth OpenID Authorization Provider Server Policy Policy Trust Access ID Token Token Data Node Submit Execute Policy Node Node Policy Policy 6 Credentials for Authentication / Authorization X.509 SAML OIDC OAuth / JWT Credential Issuer Certificate Authority Identity Provider OpenID Provider Authorization Server Credential
    [Show full text]
  • User Account and Authentication Service
    User Account and Authentication Service © 2020 General Electric Company Contents UAA Service Overview 1 About the User Account and Authentication Security Service 1 UAA Deployment Architecture 1 Understanding UAA and OAuth2 Access Token Flows 4 Obtaining Tokens Using Authorization Code Grant 4 Obtaining Tokens Using Implicit Grant 5 Obtaining Tokens Using Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant 7 Obtaining Tokens Using Client Credentials Grant 7 Understanding UAA and ID Tokens 9 Using UAA to Obtain ID Tokens 9 Get Started With the UAA Service 10 UAA Security Service Setup 10 Creating a UAA Service Instance 10 Binding an Application to the UAA Instance 13 Unbinding the UAA Instance From Your Application 15 Deleting a UAA Instance 15 Configuring the UAA Service Instance 16 About UAA Dashboard 16 Managing Clients 17 Managing Users 24 Creating Password Policies 27 Managing Identity Providers 28 OIDC Federated Authentication 37 Managing Tokens 68 Multifactor Authentication 71 Using UAA for Application Login or Logout Window 76 Using UAA to Set Up Application Login or Logout 76 Customizing the UAA Login Window for Your Application 76 Troubleshooting UAA Service 78 Troubleshooting UAA Service 78 UAA Release Notes 81 ii User Account and Authentication Service UAA Release Notes 81 iii Copyright GE Digital © 2020 General Electric Company. GE, the GE Monogram, and Predix are either registered trademarks or trademarks of General Electric Company. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. This document may contain Confidential/Proprietary information of General Electric Company and/or its suppliers or vendors. Distribution or reproduction is prohibited without permission. THIS DOCUMENT AND ITS CONTENTS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS," WITH NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF DESIGN, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Extend Identity Security to Your Apis EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
    HOW TO EXTEND IDENTITY SECURITY TO YOUR API’S WHITE PAPER TABLE OF CONTENTS 03 EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW 04 INTRODUCTION 05 OAUTH 2.0 – THE PRESENT AND FUTURE CHOICE FOR API PROTECTION How OAuth 2.0 Works 08 SAML – THE GOLD STANDARD FOR IDENTITY FEDERATION How SAML and OAuth 2.0 Work Together 10 OPENID CONNECT – CONVERGENCE IN IDENTITY STANDARDS How Connect Works 11 CONCLUSION 12 SECURING API’S WITH PING IDENTITY 2 WHITE PAPER How to Extend Identity Security to Your APIs EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW The number of users and devices requesting access to applications is growing exponentially, and enterprises are scrambling to adapt their authentication and authorization infrastructure to deal with this fast growth. REST APIs are a critical new application access channel. In a sense, REST APIs are an evolution of the SOAP-based web services of a few years ago. But because they’re much more practical for mobile clients (like native iOS and Android apps), the challenge of scaling more than SOAP web services is compounded. A REST API may be called by millions of clients, which is far more than a SOAP web service. But early deployments of REST APIs were often authenticated by passwords being attached to the client calls. For instance, if the calls were being made on behalf of a particular user (to obtain calendar data as an example) then the user would be asked to share with the API client the password for their account at the calendar provider. This model of authentication has significant privacy and security issues, including: • It’s very hard for the user to subsequently turn off the access for a given client if they want.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Identity and Identity Management Technologies
    I. Agudo, \Digital Identity and Identity Management Technologies", UPGRADE - The European Journal of the Informatics Professional, vol. 2010, pp. 6 - 12, 2010. NICS Lab. Publications: https://www.nics.uma.es/publications Digital Identity and Identity Management Technologies. Abstract: There are many technologies for identity management available in the form of open specifications, open source tools and commercial applications. Currently, there are some competing standards for identity management. At the beginning SAML was the only viable choice with a higher enough acceptance level. Recently, another technology called WS‐Federation has also gain some attention from the community. Although this technology is not as mature as SAML, it modular design gives it some advantages over SAML. It this work we mainly focus on the WS‐Federation and the family of specifications that surround it. Keywords: Identity Management, Identity Federation, Web Services Introduction It is hard to find a globally accepted definition of the term Identity and even harder to precisely define what is understood by Identity Management. A simplistic approach would consist on defining identity management as user accounts management in a software system. This was the general understanding some decades ago but in the last years, with the emergence of the Internet of Services, more complex aspects have arisen and the identity of its users have become crucial. In the first software systems, the identity of users was managed locally by the system administrator and was only valid for this particular application. In the Internet of Services, anyone can become a user of our applications and is the responsibility of the user to “manage” its identity in a proper way.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Access to E-Resources Anywhere
    Parveen Bababr Deputy Librarian, JNU (India) Remote Access in simple language is the ability to access a computer / server remotely through a network connection. The users have leverage to work remotely away from the institution/ office while retaining access to a distant computer or network. Remote Access can be applicable for Local Area Networks (LANs), Wide Area Network (WANs) and Virtual Private Networks (VPN) Remote access refers to: Connection to a data-processing system from a remote location, for example through a virtual private network or remote desktop application Remote desktop software, refers to a software or an operating system feature enabling applications to be run remotely on a server while being graphically accessible locally. Direct (Physical) Line: Through the direct line control can be implemented between a computer and institution LAN. Similar line can be used to connect a home LAN and a institution LAN. This network is faster but is more expensive and have high maintenance. The network has routing limitations due to structure of rooting from point to point. Virtual Private Networks: VPN connects to remote site through the internet with encryption and tunneling techniques to access the institution network. VPN is generally used in small organizations. Microsoft Remote Desktop Services (RDS): Remote controlled Access using RDS can be used to access the remote computer/ server on the local machine. Some other solutions like Citrix Virtual Apps, VMware, Parallels Remote Application Server (RAS) can be used through the web browser for clientless access. Other methods include Integrated Service Digital Network, Wireless Network, DSL- Digital Subscriber Line, Cable Modem etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Identityserver4 Documentation Release 1.0.0
    IdentityServer4 Documentation Release 1.0.0 Brock Allen, Dominick Baier Jul 27, 2021 Introduction 1 The Big Picture 3 1.1 Authentication..............................................4 1.2 API Access................................................5 1.3 OpenID Connect and OAuth 2.0 – better together............................5 1.4 How IdentityServer4 can help......................................5 2 Terminology 7 2.1 IdentityServer..............................................7 2.2 User....................................................8 2.3 Client...................................................8 2.4 Resources.................................................8 2.5 Identity Token..............................................8 2.6 Access Token...............................................8 3 Supported Specifications 9 3.1 OpenID Connect.............................................9 3.2 OAuth 2.0................................................9 4 Packaging and Builds 11 4.1 IdentityServer4 main repo........................................ 11 4.2 Quickstart UI............................................... 11 4.3 Access token validation handler..................................... 11 4.4 Templates................................................. 12 4.5 Dev builds................................................ 12 5 Support and Consulting Options 13 5.1 Free support............................................... 13 5.2 Commercial support........................................... 13 6 Demo Server 15 7 Contributing 17 7.1 How to contribute?...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Background on Identity Federation Technologies for the Public Safety Community
    1 Draft NISTIR 8336 2 Background on Identity Federation 3 Technologies for the Public Safety 4 Community 5 6 William Fisher 7 Mark Russell* 8 Sudhi Umarji 9 Karen Scarfone 10 11 * Former employee; all work for this 12 publication was done while at employer. 13 14 15 16 This publication is available free of charge from: 17 https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8336-draft 18 19 20 21 Draft NISTIR 8336 22 Background on Identity Federation 23 Technologies for the Public Safety 24 Community 25 William Fisher 26 Applied Cybersecurity Division 27 Information Technology Laboratory 28 29 Mark Russell* 30 Sudhi Umarji 31 The MITRE Corporation 32 McLean, VA 33 34 Karen Scarfone 35 Scarfone Cybersecurity 36 Clifton, VA 37 38 * Former employee; all work for this 39 publication was done while at employer. 40 41 This publication is available free of charge from: 42 https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8336-draft 43 44 June 2021 45 46 47 48 U.S. Department of Commerce 49 Gina Raimondo, Secretary 50 51 National Institute of Standards and Technology 52 James K. Olthoff, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce 53 for Standards and Technology & Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology 54 National Institute of Standards and Technology Interagency or Internal Report 8336 55 80 pages (June 2021) 56 This publication is available free of charge from: 57 https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8336-draft 58 Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an 59 experimental procedure or concept adequately.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Globus Auth to Streamline the Creation, Integration, and Use of Research Services
    Using Globus Auth to Streamline the Creation, Integration, and Use of Research Services Steve Tuecke [email protected] Cloud has transformed how software and platforms are delivered Software as a service: SaaS (web & mobile apps) Platform as a service: PaaS Infrastructure as a service: IaaS PaaS enables more rapid, cheap, and scalable delivery of powerful (SaaS) apps 2 3 Globus SaaS: Research data lifecycle Compute Facility Instrument Globus transfers files reliably, securely 4 Globus controls access to shared 2 files on existing storage; no need to move files to Curator reviews and cloud storage! 7 Transfer approves; data set published on campus or other system 3 Share 1 Researcher 6 Researcher initiates selects files to transfer request; or share, selects Researcher requested automatically user or group, assembles data set; by script, science and sets access describes it using Publication gateway permissions metadata (Dublin core and domain- Repository Collaborator logs in to 5 specific) • Only a Web browser Globus and accesses shared files; no local Publish 6 8 required account required; download via Globus • Use storage system Peers, collaborators search and discover of your choice datasets; transfer and share using Globus • Access using your campus credentials Discover Personal Computer 4 Platform Questions • How do you leverage Globus services in your own applications? • How do you extend Globus with your own services? • How do we empower the research community to create an integrated ecosystem of services and applications? 5 Example:
    [Show full text]