Identity federation refers to a trust relationship between two entities for using authentication information from one system in order to grant access to another system without asking for authentication information multiple times.

When you sign into a website or service, you often provide credentials like your email address and password. The site uses the information to identify who you are and give you access to the features and content that are reserved for users with registered accounts. But what if you want to access a different account on a different site? That is where identity federation comes in. This article explains how identity federation works and how it can benefit businesses and improve user experience.

Identity Federation

What Is Identity Federation?

Identity federation is a way to log in to one site using credentials from another. This way, you only need to remember one set of login information and don’t have to worry about remembering multiple usernames and passwords. Instead, users can use a single credential to access all their online accounts. The most common identity providers are social media sites like Facebook and Google. There are also enterprise-level identity providers designed for use in business environments.

How Does Identity Federation Work?

Identity federation relies on something called an identity provider. An identity provider is a website or service that stores your credentials and allows you to use them to log in to other websites or services. When you click the “Login with…” button on a website, you’re typically redirected to the identity provider’s login page. Once you enter your credentials on the identity provider’s login page, you’ll be redirected back to the original site or system without having to log in again.

Identity Federation VS SSO (Single Sign-On)

It’s important to note that identity federation differs from single sign-on (SSO). With SSO, you log in to one account and access all the other linked accounts at the same entity. That is different from identity federation, where you can use your credentials from one entity to log in to another entity.

Identity federation is a decentralized approach to authentication that allows users to access multiple online services with a single set of credentials. The main advantage is that it is more scalable and easier to manage than single sign-on. The downside is that it’s less secure since there is a possibility of using compromised credentials to access accounts at multiple entities.

Single sign-on is a centralized approach requiring users to authenticate with a single provider to access multiple online services. It’s more secure since all authentication takes place in one central location; however, it’s less scalable and more difficult to manage since each service needs individual configuration.

Single sign-on is typically used in business environments where employees need to access various resources, such as email, file sharing, and customer relationship management tools. On the other hand, identity federation is more commonly used on consumer-facing websites and apps.

So which approach is right for you? It depends on your needs. If security is your top priority, then single sign-on is the way to go. But if scalability and ease of management are more important, then identity federation might be the better choice.

Identity Federation Example

One common use case illustration for identity federation is when an organization wants to provide its customers speedy access to its online services. In this case, the organization would set up an identity provider (IdP) and configure it to authenticate users using their existing account with a third-party service, such as Facebook or Google. Once authenticated, the user can access the organization’s services without creating a new account or remembering multiple credentials.

Another common identity federation example is when an organization wants to share data with another organization securely. For example, a hospital might want to give its employees access to the patient records of a healthcare provider that uses a different electronic health records (EHR) system. In this case, the hospital would set up an IdP and configure it so its employees could use their existing hospital credentials to log in to the other EHR system. That would allow the hospital to control which employees have access to the patient records and prevent unauthorized users from gaining access.

Identity Federation Benefits

Increased Security

When you use federated login, your credentials are only stored on the identity provider’s servers. That means if one of the websites or services you’re using is compromised, your credentials are not exposed.

Convenience

With federated login, you only need to remember your credentials for one account. That can be much easier than keeping track of multiple credentials for different sites and services.

Reduced Costs

Implementing a federated login system can be less expensive than setting up and maintaining a single sign-on solution. You don’t need to build and deploy a custom SSO solution.

Drawbacks of Identity Federation

Increased Dependency

When you use federated login, you rely on the identity provider to keep your credentials safe and secure. If the identity provider experiences an outage or security breach, you may not be able to log in to the websites and services that you use.

Limited Control

You’re also giving up some control over your account with federated login. For example, if you want to change your password on one of the websites or services you use, you’ll need to do it through the identity provider.

Reduced Flexibility

Federated login systems can also be less flexible than single sign-on solutions because they typically only work with a few specific types of accounts. So, if you want to use federated login with a new website or service, it may not be compatible with the existing system.

Conclusion

Identity federation can be a convenient and secure way to manage your online accounts. However, weighing the pros and cons is important before deciding if it’s the right solution for you. A federated login may be a good option if you’re looking for a convenient way to manage multiple accounts. However, if you’re concerned about security or want more control over your account, you may want to consider a different solution.

Certified Identity Management Professional (CIMP) certification

Security should always be a priority for companies and cybersecurity policy best practices must be considered in security management. To implement these practices successfully, enterprises need security policies with clear instructions regarding data use and protection, device management and enforcement.

The Purpose of a Cybersecurity Policy

A cybersecurity policy provides a central framework for company-wide security and guards against the devastating financial and reputational effects of data breaches. The average cost of a breach is expected to reach $150 million in 2020, which is often enough to put a company out of business. Those able to bounce back often lose customers due to the negative effects of breaches on public image.

Detecting breach activity early and protecting the organization against outsider and insider threats continues to be of utmost importance when developing security policies. The number of data breach cases continues to increase from a mere 662 in 2010 to more than 1,000 by 2021 in the US and the majority of such breaches result from human error. As an increasing number of devices and third-party connections become part of enterprise networks, IT departments and cybersecurity professionals must hone in on key enterprise information security policy elements.

Identify and Define Confidential Data

Proper data protection requires knowledge of all data types within an enterprise network. Common categories of information include:

• Customer and employee profiles
• Financial data
• Health records
• Vendor accounts
• Proprietary company details

There should be a core set of standards applicable to each data type, although who requires access to data and how data is used may differ according to department-specific responsibilities and nuances in workflows.

Create Network Use and Device Management Rules

Because a growing number of employees are accessing enterprise networks with personal devices, rules for network use and device management go hand in hand. Network use policies may govern:

• Permitted and forbidden actions
• The collection, use, transfer and storage of data
• Encryption and VPN requirements
• Email use
• Password management

Device security directly impacts the effectiveness of such policies. Remote access management is a vital component of information security guidelines and must incorporate specific rules regarding how employee-owned devices are allowed to interact with networks and access data. This includes specifying trusted sources for applications, keeping devices up to date and implementing a protocol for reporting lost or stolen devices.

Include Cybersecurity Best Practices for Employees

Problems arising from insider threats account for 43% of business data loss. Therefore, security policies must include ongoing employee education in order to be effective. Policies demonstrate how to prevent security incidents through changes in network use habits. Training clarifies the importance of cybersecurity and shows employees how strategic security protocols protect company data.

Making employees aware of their roles in protecting the company minimizes risk from careless practices and increases discernment to protect against known and emerging threats. Targeted educational efforts may be required to guide employees in identifying subtle threats, such as spear phishing.

Establish Rules for Enforcement

Putting consequences for policy violations in place highlights the critical role of enterprise cybersecurity. Employees need to understand their actions can have tangible repercussions with the potential to do significant damage to the company. Rules and regulations may be enforced by:

• Determining threat severity through individual incident evaluations
• Issuing a series of warnings based on incident type and policy violation history
• Pursing termination in the event a violation results in a breach

A responsible individual or team must be put in charge of policy reinforcement and enforcement to maintain a chain of accountability and ensure consequences are consistent across the board. It should always be possible to trace incidents back to an identifiable source and execute the proper disciplinary actions to prevent future violations.

Formulate a Disaster Recovery Plan

Cybersecurity best practices for companies involve more than breach prevention; both data recovery and business continuity are also vital. IT teams must create and implement plans for routine data backup using reliable tools and storage solutions. Any third-party backup options must be thoroughly vetted to ensure reliability and security before being incorporated into an enterprise security policy.

If disaster recovery is to be successful, it’s critical for an enterprise to determine how quickly systems must be brought back online and data must be recovered to minimize losses and provide customers with uninterrupted service. These numbers should inform the creation of detailed protocols for each department and employee during the recovery process, which reduces downtime and aids in preserving a company’s reputation.

Identity and access management certifications

Conclusion

Implementing network security best practices starts with a core security policy encompassing these key areas. Each department may require additional policies pertaining to specific needs and workflows, so the IT team must stay in communication with the rest of the company to ensure all details conform with the main policy. By formulating a concrete policy governing enterprise-wide network use, companies create strong foundations for cybersecurity and have reliable frameworks for moving forward as new security needs arise.

Proper onboarding best practices to mitigate insider threats include training to educate employees and reduce the likelihood of insider threats from day one. When quizzed, employees only provide correct answers to 78% of cybersecurity questions. This disappointing level of awareness places companies at significant risk for breaches resulting from ignorance and errors.

Dangers of Deficient Onboarding

A significant number of companies fail to provide sufficient onboarding experiences for their employees. Thirty-eight percent of IT professionals report a wait period of two to four days before employees receive the access credentials required to do their jobs. In 27% of companies, employees go without access for more than a week.

Companies face one of two problems during this time:

• Employees do little or no work, resulting in lost productivity and profits
• Well-meaning colleagues share credentials, which may allow access beyond the scope of new employees’ roles

Credential sharing is just one consequence of insufficient cybersecurity education during onboarding. Employees and contractors are responsible for 48% of all business data breaches, and a great many incidents can be attributed to user ignorance. Unless cybersecurity training is an integral part of the onboarding process, employees use the systems without the ability to understand, identify and avoid security risks. In addition to leaving networks vulnerable to hackers, employee ignorance may also lead to compliance issues, which can be costly from both a legal and financial standpoint.

Determining and Enforcing Access Needs

Improper provisioning can either prevent employees from accessing essential tools and data or provide a level of access inappropriate for a particular role. To prevent bottlenecks and minimize risk, companies need to map out the access requirements for each role and establish identity and access management (IAM) policies to protect sensitive data.

Because privileged accounts can be particularly difficult to manage, businesses with large amounts of sensitive information may require tools to support zero-trust protocols. In a zero-trust environment, user identities are validated by numerous factors beyond basic role-based provisioning. Companies lacking the agility to implement granular access policies face the challenge of manually monitoring accounts, adjusting privileges and deprovisioning departing users.

A combination of detailed IAM policies and reliable access control tools makes it possible to provide employees with first-day access, thus reducing losses associated with decreased productivity. Automating the deprovisioning process ensures proper revocation of access rights and prevents employees from accessing resources they no longer need or logging in after tenure with the company has ended.

Conducting Security Training

Cybersecurity education must be an integral part of onboarding. Handing employees a guide to company security policies and assuming they’ll read and understand all the information provides little or no protection against insider threats. New hires are already overwhelmed with forms and other paperwork; another packet is likely to be given a cursory glance before getting filed, thrown away or forgotten.

IT teams and cybersecurity experts have the expertise to craft onboarding programs with a focus on employee education and can guide executives in proper IAM protocol implementation and enforcement. Employee instruction should include:

• How to recognize and report phishing attempts
• Adhering to a clean desk policy
• Proper password storage and management
• How to report security incidents and breach attempts

Employees should also be informed of additional security measures, such as monitoring and the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning. While these tools are often necessary to prevent breaches, they can also have an impact on employee privacy and must be executed with discernment.

Implementing Strict Rules for Software Use

The pursuit of convenience presents an additional cybersecurity challenge in business environments. Delays in software implementation can leave teams struggling to be productive with a suite of siloed legacy applications. Employees, especially those in younger generations, are used to seamless experiences when interacting with technology. The resulting frustration leads chief information officers to bypass IT teams in purchasing decisions up to 90% of the time.

Because these programs aren’t made subject to company IAM policies, such aggressive use of “shadow IT” puts company data at risk. An estimated one-third of successful cyberattacks will be launched on shadow IT programs by 2020. Of companies experiencing attacks, 60% go out of business within six months. Therefore, it’s imperative for IT teams to choose and implement user-friendly access management solutions and update tools as needed to support integrations and streamlined employee experiences. Employees must be made aware of the dangers of shadow IT and instructed in proper procedures for application approval prior to use.

CAMS - Certified Access Management Specialist
Apply for CAMS access management certification

Starting employees off with a solid understanding of security procedures and enforcing strong IAM policies supports accountability and minimizes breach threats. IT teams must work with executives, HR and other key players within businesses to design and implement frictionless IAM using data and feedback from real-world use cases. Additional monitoring services and routine vulnerability assessments provide support to create robust, reliable cybersecurity protocols.

Many industry professionals are challenged when trying to explain various authorization and authentication standards such as OAuth, OpenID Connect, and SAML to their counterparts or management. This is not to say that they don’t understand the concepts or how they are used but these protocols are so closely related and similar that they may confuse anyone learning about or attempting to promote authorization and authentication standards within their organizations.

Data leaks, security breaches, and other security failures are some of the reasons why improving online security with authorization and authentication standards cannot be emphasized enough. In this article, we look at the following security protocols and describe each standard, its purpose, and how it differs from the other standards:

• OAuth
• OpenID Connect
• SAML

OAuth Authorization Standard

OAuth is an open-standard authorization protocol that allows a user to share information from an existing system with a new system without having to share the same information repeatedly with new systems.

An example of OAuth in use is when you allow or authorize an application to access another application to access your contact information or profile data. This authorization is enabled when the user allows the Identity Provider to share a token with the new application which remains active until it is revoked.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) originally published OAuth (Open Authorization) as RFC 5849 in April 2010. Since then, OAuth has undergone one major update, which was in October 2012. In this update, OAuth was published as RFC 6749; leading to the creation of OAuth 2.0.

The purpose of OAuth is to provide the Client with secure delegated access to server resources on behalf of the resource owner. OAuth has four key concepts, which are:

• Client: An application that makes protected resource requests on behalf of a resource owner.
• Resource server: Hosts the protected resources.
• Authorization server: Issues access tokens to the Client.
• Resource owner: Grants access to the protected resource.

One major difference between these standards is that OpenID Connect and OAuth are more like specifications while SAML seems like a ready-to-work tool. OAuth specification, however, appears to be lower on details compared to OpenID Connect specification.

OpenID Connect Authentication Standard

OpenID Connect is a layer on top of OAuth, which is an authentication protocol that allows users to log into websites and apps using their existing credentials from another site. OpenID Connect adds an extra layer of security by encrypting the connection between the user and the site or app. This makes it more difficult for hackers to intercept the login information and gain access to the user’s account. In addition, OpenID Connect also allows users to log in without having to remember a separate username and password for each site or app. This makes it more convenient for users to use their existing credentials from another site to log in. Overall, OpenID Connect provides a high level of security, making it a great choice for website and app developers looking to protect their users’ information.

Openid.net describes OpenID Connect as a simple layer based on the OAuth 2.0 protocol. This standard lets Clients verify the End-User’s identity based on the authentication that Authorization Server carries out. It also obtains basic profile information about the End-User. And it does that in a REST-like, interoperable manner.

Created in 2014, OpenID Connect is the youngest protocol of the three we have today. It was created to make complicated things doable and ensure that simple ones remain simple. OpenID Connect (OIDC) works by adding the OpenID scope value to the OAuth Authorization Request. Ideally, there are two paramount building blocks of the OpenID flow.

• Rps (Relying Parties): OAuth 2.0 Clients that use OIDC
• Ops (OpenID Providers): OAuth 2.0 Authentication Servers that implement OIDC

The difference between OIDC and other standards is mainly seen in the purpose of these three standards. That being said, SAML is for exchanging both authorization and authentication information between interested parties. OAuth, on the other hand, only focuses on authorization, whereas, OpenID Connect adds a layer of authentication over existing OAuth specifications. By so doing, OpenID Connect effectively provides both authorization and authentication possibilities.

SAML Authorization and Authentication Standards

Security Assertion Markup Language, or simply SAML, is an open standard where authorization and authentication information is exchanged between a service provider and an identity provider. OASIS Security Services Technical Committee is behind the creation of this standard. The committee created it in 2002; making it the oldest protocol there is today.

Since its creation, SAML has undergone two updates. The first update was in 2003, and it was a minor one. It saw SAML updated to version 1.1. The second update was in 2005 when SAML was updated to version 2.0. That being said, SAML has four key concepts that underwent major changes between versions 1.0 and 2.0.

These concepts include:

• Protocols: Show how some elements of SAML are packaged within the SAML requests and response elements.
• Profiles: Comprehensively describe how protocols, bindings, and assertions work together to support a defined use case.
• Bindings: A SAML protocol that maps onto standard messaging formats.
• Security Assertions: Facts that service providers use to come up with access-control decisions.

According to most software engineers, SAML appears to be the most complex standard to use and implement. That is because it uses an old-school approach for configuration, where you rely on XML files for writing. This is different from OAuth and OpenID where JWT and HTTP are used.

Verdict: What is the Best Standard?

OAuth is a great option for someone relying heavily on the authorization. OpenID Connect, on the other hand, is suitable for authentication heavy integrations. Finally, SAML comes in handy when you are already using it, as mixing things might lead to more confusion.

Identity and access management certifications

Self driving car security risksThe autonomous vehicle is often hailed as the transportation of the future and warrants an assessment of the self driving car security risks. With tech giants from Apple to Google to Tesla throwing their considerable weight behind the venture, the future may come sooner than expected. Self-driving vehicles offer the promise of enhanced safety and improved convenience – not to mention the undeniably cool novelty of it all – but they also come with a darker side. Since they’re essentially internet cars, these high-tech autos are potentially vulnerable to a whole host of security issues. To get to the bottom of these security risks, and to find out what automakers are doing about them, let’s take a closer look at how the next generation of autonomous vehicles is preparing to hit the road.

 

The State of the Self Driving Vehicle

Fully autonomous cars may not be quite ready for primetime yet, but they’re getting closer to reality than ever before. More than 60 cities around the globe have driverless car testing programs either ongoing or in preparation, and nearly three dozen others have launched efforts exploring vehicle automation. A staggering $60 billion value will be attributed to autonomous or driverless car market by 2026. Major equity firms have already invested $12 billion in 2021 which is up 50% from 2020. There are over 1400 self driving cars in the US which are being tested by 80 companies, 64 of which are registered in California. Virtually every modern automaker has dedicated resources to driver automation. While only about 130,000 vehicles per year are currently being sold with partial automation, more than 96 million will be sold by 2040 – representing 95 percent of all vehicles sold.

As it currently stands, the undisputed leaders in self-driving vehicles are Tesla, Waymo, Apple and General Motors. Tesla has already made inroads with its semi-autonomous electric vehicles, and CEO Elon Musk remains resolute in his goal to take a cross-country trip with no human driver inputs. If successful, this full automation technology is expected to be pushed out to consumers shortly thereafter. Waymo, the self-driving car project started by Google, can boast more than five million real-world miles driven by its stable of autonomous vehicles, along with pilot initiatives for autonomous ridesharing programs and other ventures. Apple has rapidly expanded to become one of the largest permit-holders for self-driving vehicle tests, while GM’s self-driving Cruise AV is waiting on approval to become the first self-driving commercial vehicle to do away with manual driver controls entirely. If approved, GM will put a fleet of 2,500 such vehicles into use as so-called “robo-taxis” in the next few years.

CMSC Metaverse security certificationIn June 2022, the Chinese technology company Baidu used its metaverse app to introduce Robo-01 self driving car which is expected to hit the market in 2023 starting at $30,000 minimum.

Self Driving Car Security

With self-driving capabilities becoming closer and closer to reality for private vehicles and public transit alike, it’s natural to wonder about the safety and security of these new technologies. Indeed, a recent report compiled by the FBI highlighted a number of security concerns associated with self-driving vehicles, concluding that equipping a vehicle with autonomous technologies could make it “more of a potential lethal weapon than it is today.” Terrorism is one concern, as terrorists could potentially pack a vehicle with explosives and turn it into a driverless bomb on wheels, controlling it from a safe, remote location.

Of greater concern for the average driver or passenger, however, is the risk of bad actors hacking into and seizing control of a car’s driving controls and other essential systems. This access could potentially be used to deliberately cause accidents or to drive a vehicle to a chop-shop or other unsavory destination, putting an all-new, technologically savvy spin on car theft. It could also enable criminals to lock passengers inside their vehicles, driving them somewhere against their will or holding them hostage for ransom money. Further complicating matters is the fact that, because self-driving technology is still in its early stages, the full scope of autonomous car security risks is not yet understood.

A Real-World Threat

This may all sound like much ado about nothing, but these concerns are more than just hypothetical. White-hat hackers have been demonstrating security flaws in connected vehicles for years, illustrating how easy it is to seize control over a variety of systems by exploiting even non-automated cars. The problems are only exacerbated with internet cars, where many – or all – of a vehicle’s systems are controlled by computers and therefore open to attack. Even Tesla’s advanced Autopilot system can be tricked fairly easily. A Chinese security firm recently showed how easy it is to spoof the car’s sensor systems, causing them to sense phantom objects or fail to detect real ones.

Grappling With Self Driving Car Security Risks

While hackers represent a clear and present threat to autonomous car security, they’ve also proven to be valuable allies. Automakers have been employing ethical hackers in recent years to test their control systems and expose vulnerabilities, allowing them to identify and patch security flaws before these systems hit the road. DEF CON, the world’s largest annual hacker convention, regularly hosts a feature called Car Hacking Village, wherein hackers from around the world compete to hack into a variety of vehicle technologies in an effort to improve cybersecurity efforts in the automotive industry.

The United States government, too, has moved to begin grappling with the reality of self-driving vehicles. A bipartisan SELF DRIVE Act laid out the basic groundwork for autonomous vehicle regulations in 2017, including provisions to support greater testing and innovation, simplify safety standards and mandate that carmakers put in place plans to protect against and respond to cybersecurity threats, secure their vehicle technologies and protect users’ personal data. Additional rule changes are likely to be needed in the coming years, but self driving car security has clearly become a priority for lawmakers and regulators.

Do Consumers Trust Self-Driving Cars?

The technology to enable fully autonomous self-driving vehicles is almost ready to hit the market, but is there a market for these cars in the first place? Resistance to autonomous technology has certainly been on the decrease – recent surveys have shown the number of people who would be afraid to ride in a self-driving car has fallen by 15 percent in just the last year – but many consumers are still not ready to put their trust in autonomous vehicles. Another survey revealed that 67 percent of Americans were concerned about potential cybersecurity threats.

It’s worth noting, however, that some of the resistance to self-driving cars may simply be due to a lack of familiarity on the part of consumers. About 65 percent of Americans know little or nothing about the development of autonomous vehicles, and those who are most informed also tend to show the fewest concerns and reservations. Recent trends suggest that consumers will become steadily more accepting of driverless vehicles as they become more familiar and widespread.

There’s little question that driverless vehicles will be the transportation of the future, but when that future will arrive remains an open question. There are plenty of serious security concerns to be addressed before self-driving cars can be widely adopted, and consumers remain rightfully skeptical of automakers’ ability to protect their vehicles from unauthorized access. Still, with the ever-evolving march of technology – and the assistance of unlikely hacker allies – it likely won’t be long before safer, smarter, more secure self-driving vehicles fill roads across the nation.

IAM certification

In an expanding digital world where demand for system access is on the rise, modern authentication methods are necessary to improve upon basic authentication to ensure security. With so many sensitive and confidential data stored and shared electronically, it’s more important than ever to ensure data is safe from prying eyes and hackers. One way to do this is by using modern authentication methods. Here is the basic rundown of modern authentication methods.

Modern Authentication Methods

What Is Modern Authentication?

Modern authentication is a method of authenticating users that relies on multiple factors to verify the identity of a user. These factors can include something that the user knows, such as a password or PIN, something that the user has, such as a security token or smartphone, or something that the user is, such as a fingerprint or iris scan. Modern authentication security is enhanced when multiple authentication factors are used compared to traditional methods that rely on a single factor, such as a password.

In addition, modern authentication can be more convenient for users since they can use their fingerprint or iris scan to log in rather than remembering a long password. As a result, modern authentication is becoming increasingly popular for businesses and individuals.

How Modern Authentication Compares to Basic Authentication

There are two schools of thought regarding authentication: the old-fashioned way of using a username and password and the newer, more modern authentication approach of using biometrics and multi-factor authentication. Let’s look at both methods to see how they compare.

Username and password-based authentication has been around for a long time, and it is still more widely used. However, it also has its drawbacks. One of the biggest problems is that passwords can be guessed or stolen, making them less secure than other modern methods. Additionally, users often have to remember multiple passwords for different accounts, which can be difficult to manage or even make security less effective as users will end up using the same password for accessing multiple accounts.

On the other hand, modern authentication is more secure since biometric authentication uses physical characteristics like fingerprints or iris scans that are unique to each individual. This makes it much harder for someone to access an account fraudulently. Additionally, biometrics can be used with other authentication methods in a multi-factor authentication scheme, such as passwords or PIN codes, to add an extra layer of security.

However, biometrics can be expensive and require special hardware, making them less widely used than passwords.

Overall, there are pros and cons to both modern and basic authentication methods. Username and password authentication is cost effective and widely used, but less secure, while biometrics are more secure and expensive, thus less widely used. The best approach for any situation will depend on the importance of security, cost, and convenience.

Modern Authentication and Multi-Factor Authentication

Multi-factor authentication (MFA) is an authentication method that requires more than one factor to verify the identity of a user. The most common type of MFA is two-factor authentication (TFA), which uses something the user knows (such as a password) and something the user has (such as a smartphone) to verify the identity of the user.

Modern authentication methods can leverage MFA, but they do not require it. MFA is typically used when security is of the utmost importance, such as when accessing sensitive data or financial accounts, and, when one of the authentication factors is considered weak such as password. However, MFA can also be more convenient for users than traditional authentication methods since they only need to remember a single password or PIN.

How Modern Authentication Methods Works

Modern authentication relies on multiple as well as strong factors such as biometrics to authenticate users with  a combination of the following factors:

• Something the user knows: It could be a password, PIN, or pattern.
• Something the user has: It could be a security token, smartphone, or keycard.
• Something the user is: It could be a fingerprint, iris scan, or voiceprint.

Once the user’s identity has been verified, the system will grant access to the requested resource.

How Advanced Authentication Improves Cybersecurity

As the world becomes increasingly digital and embrace strong cybersecurity measures, hackers continue to target vulnerable security and access entry points. While authentication methods have evolved to meet security challenge, so have hackers’ techniques to bypass them. As a result, it is essential for organizations to continually update their authentication systems to ensure that they are as secure as possible.


One example of an organization that has done this is Microsoft which has moved away from basic to modern authentication method on Exchange Online to improve security.

By moving to more modern authentication methods, Microsoft has made it much more difficult for attackers to gain access to its systems. This will help protect the company’s data and ensure that its customers can trust their information safeguard measures. As more companies adopt similar authentication measures, it will become increasingly difficult for attackers to compromise accounts and steal information.

Conclusion

Modern authentication methods have come a long way in recent years. By combining the best of traditional and newer approaches, we can now enjoy much more comprehensive and effective security for our digital assets. However, no single solution is perfect, and staying abreast of the latest threats and vulnerabilities is always important. As the saying goes, “the only thing that’s constant is change,” and this is certainly true regarding cybersecurity. So keep learning, stay alert, and be prepared to adjust your authentication strategy as needed to keep your data safe and secure.

Identity and access management certifications