Comments on: The Boundaries of IAM: Interactions with Adjacent Technologies http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/2009/09/17/the-boundaries-of-iam-interactions-with-adjacent-technologies/ A member of the Gartner Blog Network Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:48:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Rob Lewis http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/2009/09/17/the-boundaries-of-iam-interactions-with-adjacent-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-167 Rob Lewis Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:21:34 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/?p=134#comment-167 MLS, or multilevel security, matches security ranking of files with the clearances of users. Access controls in secure installations, usually found in the military or intelligence setting. I am sure that I have seen mentions of it on John Pescatore's blog in the past. :) MLS, or multilevel security, matches security ranking of files with the clearances of users. Access controls in secure installations, usually found in the military or intelligence setting.

I am sure that I have seen mentions of it on John Pescatore’s blog in the past. :)

]]> By: Earl Perkins http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/2009/09/17/the-boundaries-of-iam-interactions-with-adjacent-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-164 Earl Perkins Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:43:24 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/?p=134#comment-164 Rob, to show my ignorance, i have to ask what "MLS" means. your description also sounds a bit marketing-like, since i don't know it means. not trying to sound confrontational, i suppose it would require more discussion. the boundary isn't hard and fast-- that's one of the reasons why it keeps expanding and, in some cases, contracting. it also doesn't preclude any one vendor from attempting to reconfigure the "logical feature set", i.e. create a product whose features may come from several different existing product sets, but by the nature of combination make more business sense for the client-- as well as the architecture to deliver it. it's the wild west at the boundary. Rob,
to show my ignorance, i have to ask what “MLS” means. your description also sounds a bit marketing-like, since i don’t know it means. not trying to sound confrontational, i suppose it would require more discussion.

the boundary isn’t hard and fast– that’s one of the reasons why it keeps expanding and, in some cases, contracting. it also doesn’t preclude any one vendor from attempting to reconfigure the “logical feature set”, i.e. create a product whose features may come from several different existing product sets, but by the nature of combination make more business sense for the client– as well as the architecture to deliver it. it’s the wild west at the boundary.

]]> By: Rob Lewis http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/2009/09/17/the-boundaries-of-iam-interactions-with-adjacent-technologies/comment-page-1/#comment-135 Rob Lewis Sat, 03 Oct 2009 00:30:42 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/earl-perkins/?p=134#comment-135 Hi Earl, I am following your posts with interest because we do something that is in the IAM realm. However, I am having a little trouble reconciling what we do with your descriptions of inside the boundary and adjacent technologies, since we touch on entitlement management, analytics solutions, PUM and GRCM. We say that we do an authorization component post-authentication, for simplicity, but we don't do authentication ourselves. We do a new, more user friendly implementation of MLS that scales into a full cross domain solution with commonly used enterprise systems. Any thoughts? Hi Earl,

I am following your posts with interest because we do something that is in the IAM realm. However, I am having a little trouble reconciling what we do with your descriptions of inside the boundary and adjacent technologies, since we touch on entitlement management, analytics solutions, PUM and GRCM. We say that we do an authorization component post-authentication, for simplicity, but we don’t do authentication ourselves.

We do a new, more user friendly implementation of MLS that scales into a full cross domain solution with commonly used enterprise systems.

Any thoughts?

]]>