! #$%%& " '$%%& ( )$%%&

Transcription

1 !"! #$%%& " '$%%& ( )$%%&

2 ,! " #$$ % $ % &" ' ( ) ) & " ' ( *!*! # $ -.!*! # / 0 & - & $ (1 23( 4 2,!( ) # 1+ ' * ' ( $!+, -. ( /!% & /(+ (53 $ &$, +6(53 4 & "!(!+! -+*!7 $% &# * "+/ $8 0 (1 2 $ ) $ 3 ) 4,! #% The opinions expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. Reproduction is authorized, provided the source (egovernment Unit, DG Information Society, European Commission) is clearly acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. *!" '$%%&+

3 ! " #$$!!,!$%%&7(!!6!0 +0!!6 0,!!1 1" 9!6 0!!!6+,!!! :,! :,!+!; :,!! 0!( * 0 <3=0! 0!!,!%%>6?$%%&$4!$8 *$%%),!!0!! 0! *0!./< =3</ = + ( ,!!2 32@63"!A +/ o (5 2/(+!2BB000 B o 5 2? +!2BB o,!+7<71,= 2"!(!+!2BB0001 o 30,30+/ C2? +!2BB % /1%%C+/ 2D (!2E$<4=$#8 *92E$<4=$'4' *!" '$%%&+ $

4 % &" ' (,!! 0!!! 2,!0!!B 0!! F 5!!!+.,!0! 5!!1,!0!!11!+ 0!!5 00! <+( + G=,!!0!!!H"!!(+!! +!!,!!!!!!!(* 0 0,!!!!,!!0!!!(+! + 0! 11,!!0! 0!+0!!! 7!+!!0 0!95,!0!0!(! 57!5 0!11!!!!0!! 1!0 7 <7=+ 7 +/.<7/=+,!0!0! *!" '$%%&+

5 ) & " ' ( )! )% & ' (,!0!!B 0!! F 5!!!+.,!0! 5!!1 45 & ' (,!0!!0.!*!2 7!!*!$#0!0!,!0!!0!!50! 0!;! 0! 0!,!0!!2 o o o ! 5!0!+ /(!65+, + "!(! -5* 0 +* ":,! 0.+! 0!!6 : 1! 0 IA7?,!0!!.!! 0!!!!0!,!00!!/ 0!1 #!+&!!0! *!" '$%%&+ #

6 )) (1,! 0!;!0!!0! 0!!/ 0-.+3,! 4!! 0!! +0 5!0 9J1F JF79;!,!;!2! "#$ %&# ' ( ),!0!;!9! +50!;<!0=,!0 9 / +C++3+!K!(<#=+0! 9!,!;02! +!! 0!!0!L9 0!!! 9L0 0!!! <;++!+!9=!! *9 +(!9,!0; ; L+ + +,!!0! '!!! /!+!!!!! *9 +C ;<=!-!!+ C 0B!0!! 0-!!!+;L 0!!LC0!0!+ 3 0!! 7! 3!!! 1 <+!!1.; =!!!! 7!! 9;+/ C *!" '$%%&+ &

7 * $,!; 0!!!!+ 0!!!0! +!! 9!,!!!!!,!,!! +0!!0;+!7! ;!,!!! F!,!+!! 0 +, !9!!!!,!9!.+ 90!+7 +!!0!0!!/!!!+! % #. # "# / '01 2 %+% $ $$ 4 5,!!;!! 9,! 0!9 F!!!! 0 +0!!"!(! <7=* "</=+!! +!+!!!!.,!!! +++! 9<+ =7+!,,(0;! 0,! 0!;! +!; 7+!!0! !! +!!! +!!,!!!00! 0 2!!!!! *!" '$%%&+ 4

8 ,6!! +0 ;!! 6 5! ;++0!!.!,!;!2.. "# "# "## "# "# 0 # 7,!0 *++ ++(+ K0+/! -0!!! 0! 2 K0! o!! : o,!!00!!!!0!!!: o!!; < =!!!!+ 0!! : o +!! ; : o 71 <(@=0 <+ =+0!! 0< =!!(@ : o,!!!2 (@. C(@. : o!!!!! 1+!0!!.0!! 0!: o,!!f!(@1 : o!!! : o!k0.!; +!!.F: *!" '$%%&+ )

9 o /!+!0. 00! *0! o,!*!;.2! <+9+G=!0,!*!! <!=!: o,0! 2,!! 0!+ ;!!! 0!0!!0 +1: C0!!! ;M70 <!+G=+ 0!!!!*!,!! +;.! o!:,!! 0!9!!+!!!!!0!!.+!.+!.!0! +0!!0!!. 0!!!! ++9,!! o o o o o 1! < +!G=! ++0!! <=!: 7!<7=0!0.,!; <+!+.=!0!0 7: !! B!B,! 9!!!!!!! : 6!!0!! <=+!!! ; 0!;<+=!!!!;! : /.F+!!+! F (! o 0(!.: o,!! 0!!: o,!!++!3 7 *!" '$%%&+ 8

10 8 $!,! 0 9!.F 70!.F < <=+<=+ G=0 1,!! F!.2! 7 0<!= 0!2F <= 0!!0!!! ;! B60!!2! 0!B;0!!!+0!!!!.!!1! B!0!!!B! M!.!!!!0 0!1 K!0+!!.L L!B!++.! +!!! +!9! 0!!,! ;!0 2+++!+G,! <1=0!N!! <+!!=+ <+!!=O!!! 216!,!!; '%09,!9!.!! < 0=! 0!! + 0,!!!0!0! :+ +0!!!! +!97+!!1<+ 0= 7!+!!!!+!,!! 0! 0<+ 9!!+ =+0!!0!!!! 0 +!!0. B2!!.! B!!M!!+!00!!! ;M!!!!!9!!9!.F +!. *!" '$%%&+ '

11 * ' ( $ -?P 3 -S "T 7Q C 6,!L 7!,!<( F- =,!L 7,! 3 (, R 7, R R 7, - 6 R ( ( U C6 R V, /U K3 5 V! 7 9 R *,L* (, / R U. 3V R 9 C / - 6 R ( (? / R R L <7/=, +C ( 6 6 R ; 6 7! (, R Q! * *" R 6@C - 1 6@ R! 0 *!" '$%%&+ %

12 C /,+ (, ( / R - 6 R ( ( / R / K- R, 6 " R U L6 6 R! 7 /,!<( R F- = K ( 6L7W (, * 7! / X R!!! </= 7!!! / X R!!! </= R L <7/= (! 6 R (! -+* "!! 7, / * 7, *!" '$%%&+

13 , -. ( : -!!!!!++! 7 ' % ;- eeurope 2005 Action Plan Identity management in the EU should be advanced by addressing interoperability issues as well as future needs while taking into account differences in legal and cultural practices and the EU framework for data protection. EU programmes for research & development, deployment and implementation should contribute coherently (i.e. FP6/IST eten and IDA). 3 *!" '$%%&+ $

14 Objective: coherent approach in identity management in e-govt. to assess the impact on the policies supporting cross-border and cross sector egovernment services including but not limited to company registration, procurement, and citizen mobility prospective analysis of possible initiatives and solutions at European level information on identity technologies, related market developments and technical requirements methodology to feed the framework described in Lot 1 with actual use cases of good practices in identity management and with their analysis egovernment Identity Management working group 4 Dimensions Technical Identity management Organizational Legal 5 *!" '$%%&+

15 Methodology Monitoring Passive extraction Proactively contacting authorities In-depth assessment Questionnaire: key attributes (channels, technologies, language and accessibility, prior registration, cross-border, security) Detailed evaluation of top projects: potential Good Practice cases Proactive communication Workshops Identity management reports Periodic newsletters egovernment Identity Management working group 6 Context and Players (1/3) eeurope 2005 egovernment subgroup EU signature directive (1999) EESSI (CEN/ISS and ETSI) CEN TC224 machine readable cards and related device interfaces and operations: CEN/BT/WG 159 maintenance of EESSI Standards CEN/TC 224/WG 15 European citizen cards CEN/ISSS Workshop on eauthentication Porvoo e-id group 8 *!" '$%%&+ #

16 Context and Players (2/3) IST projects GUIDE: Toward a European Identity Management Architecture for egovernment ( PRIME: Privacy and Identity Management for Europe ( BioSec ( NoE: FIDIS, ECRYPT EUCLID European Initiative for a Citizen digital ID solution (FP5) epoch: demonstrating interoperability of smart card based e-id solutions (FP5) egovernment Research & Development FIDELITY ASIT: Survey on EU s Electronic ID-Solutions 9 Context and Players (3/3) E-government Lot 1 and 2 Lot 1 Good practice framework for egovernment search/gpf/ BearingPoint Fraunhofer common description template define assessment criteria in-depth analysis of good practice examples intelligent knowledge base and website Lot 2: Study on interoperability at local and regional level - European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA) Institut für Informationsmanagement Bremen GmbH (ifib) Center for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH/ITI) 10 *!" '$%%&+ &

17 :* 6. %.'<)% ;-,2 7! L7-7! Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What is GUIDE: GUIDE is a EC funded Integrated Project that is pursuing research, technological development, and implementation with the aim of creating an architecture that will enable open and interoperable e-government electronic identity services in the EU. The Problem: The problem that GUIDE addresses is the definition of a logical, technical, institutional, and policy/legal framework supporting the development of identity management services which integrates existing IdM systems while being consistent with the juridical and regulatory conditions prevailing in member states. The Aim: The aim of GUIDE is not to address national IdM issues as such, nor is it to enable nationally constructed applications. Its objective instead concerns interoperability across national systems and structures (processes, cooperation, interfaces) within broader transnational, policy, legislative, and socio-economic boundaries. Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture The Vision: GUIDE s vision is to develop an architecture that integrates local, regional, national, and pan- European IdM services in an interoperable manner that allows accommodating the requirements of member states. The architecture is consistent with the principle of subsidiarity and is based a federated information infrastructure model that respects the sovereignty of member states in identity management issues, rather than a hierarchical one. The operating principle: The central operating assumption of GUIDE is that IdM for e-government requires more than transforming paper-based forms of information exchange into digital ones. E-Government involves significant transformations along institutional, policy, legislative, and technological lines. *!" '$%%&+ 4

18 Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture Objectives of the GUIDE Government Engagement Strategy: To provide GUIDE with a venue through which to understand the tactical and strategic concerns of governments To enable GUIDE to better target its research and development objectives Four Phases of the Engagement Strategy: face to face consultations with senior government officials involved with policy and technological aspects of IdM at local, national, and EU levels; Te formation of an Advisory Board to be composed of senior government officials and other experts involved in IdM; A series of high visibility workshops around the EU; The formation of a GUIDE extranet and an observatory on IdM issues in the EU and internationally. Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What We Have Learned Lack of a common conceptual framework of IdM: This should address the issue of using open interoperability standards in order to be able to electronically identify the relevant characteristics of a natural person or legal entity, as well as whether an administrative entity has been mandated by another such entity to perform a legal action in a verifiable and secure way. The emphasis should be on developing a common conceptual and semantic frame of reference of an IdM architecture that can work in the context of the existing institutional, political and legal diversity that marks the EU.. Public IdM is a crucial enabler of pan-european e-government services development for the Internal Market: A2A, A2B or A2C? Though all three dimensions are important for member state governments, there is a preference for the A2B and often the A2A dimensions. IdM and interoperability across national business registration methods, e-procurement procedures, or establishing conditions of trusted inter-governmental information exchang, as examples, must be given priority for the deepening of the Internal Market and improved competitiveness of EU. *!" '$%%&+ )

19 Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What We Have Learned Multilateralism vs. bilateralism: Not diametrically opposite options or mutually exclusive alternatives. It is important to distinguish and research the kinds of data, and the legal and policy mechanisms that govern them, with respect to the necessity and relative degree of their multilateralism or bilateralism (while respecting the constitutional and legal restrictions that apply to them). For instance, from a citizen and business perspective authorization is at application level provision, not a central responsibility, whereas the opposite tends to be the case for identification across member states. As a result, a rules engine could be held centrally to enable the processing of bi-lateral agreements between Member States in relation to identity interoperability. A Federated IdM Architecture: Two different topologies of identity federation: centralized vs. distributed. Consensus that each member state will connect to the GUIDE federation via a local (distributed) gateway, together with a centralised hub to control the registration and mutual authentication of these gateways. This distributed gateway approach leaves the responsibility for the maintenance and protection of stored citizen and business identity data with the owning member state. The hub only manages Member State gateway identities. The key issue is what is in the hub and who decides its composition. What will be the function of the hub? Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What We Have Learned Security, trust, and privacy: Issues of security, trust, and privacy both along citizen or business/government interfaces and the government/government dimensions remain fundamental requirements for IdM. The leitmotif here is: which procedures on IdM can we trust when we deal with other governments and their departments? Trust across administrations and along the interfaces of administration and citizen and administration and businesses are the key issue. Success in this area depends not just on good technical solutions, but on the trust that the users put into the solution. Trusted Third Parties: Widespread skepticism among EU governments and heavily qualified positions. There is not a clear position that fits all member states for all applications. The general skepticism about TTPs is not related to any ideological or political principle. Instead, it is related to the lack of a proper regulatory and policy framework to ensure adequate government oversight of the handling of information. *!" '$%%&+ 8

20 Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What We Have Learned Risk management and liability: Critical area: without proper conditions for addressing risk and liability across all parties involved in IdM technological solutions remain fundamentally indexes or catalogues of identity characteristics. Risk management and liability the regulatory and legal frameworks and recourse are critical conditions that establish the grounds for any exchange, e-government or any other. Business modeling of federated architectures: Research is needed into business models of federated architectures: Assuming that the GUIDE architecture becomes the central instrumentality of IdM in the EU who has ownership of it and what are the financial implications of its maintenance for its constituent governments? Measuring Identity Management and e-government initiatives: Research must address the issue of measurement of IdM and e-government initiatives. The production of meaningful cross-country statistics is a key issue that will provide compelling arguments for further development and commitment of governments to IdM and e-government services. Critical Aspects of Open IdM e-government Architecture What We Have Learned Understanding the impact of IdM and e-government on the operations of government and their overall economic effects: Research must move beyond looking at the comparative conditions enabling the uptake of e-government services and focus on the impact of IdM for e-government on the operations of government (efficiency etc.) and its overall economic effects. The elaboration of efficiency models, in their economic, social and political dimensions, as a result, is a priority. Connecting research and policy making: A critical issue remains that of connecting research on IdM and policy making. This must include coordination of several EC and government initiatives in the domain of e-government. Two particular directions in which GUIDE could contribute have been singled out by several governments: the first concerns IDA and its research activities; the second concerns the MODINIS program. *!" '$%%&+ '

21 : $ '9 '=94,2 e-identity and identity documents why do we use identities with e- government services to ensure that only entitled persons make an application to be able to remotely access personal data to enable later delivery for general applications e-identities and identity documents must relate however, e-identities can also exist for limited purposes MODINIS Leuven identification for e-services many e-services can (and should) live without use of identities (e.g. solely on the basis of being paid for) some e-services can use temporary identification (e.g. from application to a later delivery) core government business needs high quality identification (e.g. personal documents) MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $%

22 identities and signatures signature per se is not identification certificates/signatures authenticate names identities have to cope with identical names identities have to cope with changing names IDENTITY IS SIGNATURE PLUS MODINIS Leuven registration one person any number of signatures one person any number of one person one e-identities registering for the e-signature associating signatures to identities identity signature authentication MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $

23 ubiquitous e-use avoid central information about identity during use (non traceable) avoid information exchange to and among applications use signature to authenticate against identity record SINGLE IDENTITY -- DATA POTECTION MODINIS Leuven revocation ( ) identity signature authentication revocation is needed to correct errors and prevent from abuse identity as a compound of an identity structure and an electronic signature can be revoked by revoking the associated signature this will be an extremely rare situation sig MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $$

24 example MODINIS Leuven proxy parents for children, attorneys, etc. CEOs for companies etc. substitute identity limit role limit time revoke SIGNATURE AND IDENTITY RECORDS CAN CAN BE BE USED USED REVOCATION NEEDS A CENTRAL SERVICE MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $

25 identity an the businesses avoiding big brother administration is divided in administrative sectors each sector has its unique ID one way functions hash (identity & sector ID) inhibit cross identification each company is treated like a sector GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT ID CAN ID CAN BE USED BE USED IN IN THE THE PRIVATE SECTOR PRIVATE WITHOUT SECTOR COMPROMISING WITHOUT COMPROMISING DATAPROTECTION PROTECTION MODINIS Leuven identity an the businesses avoiding big brother administration is divided in administrative sectors each sector has its unique ID one way functions hash (identity & sector ID) inhibit cross identification each company is treated like a sector GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT ID CAN ID CAN BE USED BE USED IN IN THE THE PRIVATE SECTOR PRIVATE WITHOUT SECTOR COMPROMISING WITHOUT COMPROMISING DATAPROTECTION PROTECTION MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $#

26 the standards W3C OASIS Liberty Alliance SAML XMLdsig MODINIS Leuven the identity record.at <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <saml:assertion xmlns:pr=" xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:saml:1.0:assertion".. <saml:attributestatement> <saml:subject> <saml:subjectconfirmation> <saml:confirmationmethod>urn:oasis:names:tc:saml:1.0:cm :sender-vouches</saml:confirmationmethod> <saml:subjectconfirmationdata> <pr:person si:type="pr:physicalpersontype"><pr:identification><pr:value >7WQQKHxgWhzUYMTT0zXrBw==</pr:Value><pr:Type>urn:publicid:gv.at:baseid</pr:Type></pr:Identification><pr:Name><pr:GivenNa me>reinhard</pr:givenname><pr:familyname primary="undefined">posch</pr:familyname></pr:name><pr:dateo fbirth> </pr:dateofbirth></pr:person> MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $&

27 incorporating other approaches the.at concept incorporates any identification under the following conditions recognized by the respective authority based on e-signature using some identity string (e.g. number) the.at concept is devoted to data protection identity string area specific one way function will not compromise other schemes the.at concept separates from physical layers any accepted signature will do XML transform allows transparent mapping MODINIS Leuven Belgium, Finland, Italy.at egov application.at egov application.at egov application.at egov application ONE SIZE FITS ALL security layer signature interface e.g. PKCS#11 Identity string mapping ID with recognized signature (card based or not) MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $4

28 open interface / open source Austria follows a strict OPEN INTERFACE policy in its egovernment suggestions administration on the net gives a constantly updated overview as well as the links serves as a platform for communications wherever possible an open source approach is evaluated and if appropriate followed MODINIS Leuven AT: MOA approach the core modules for online applications are centrally developed and offered for free to all administrations the central ICT- strategy unit serves a a competence center free free distribution of of applications and source and source is used is as used a tool as for dissemination a tool for and dissemination coordination on and a coordination voluntary and on incentive a bassis voluntary and incentive basis MODINIS Leuven *!" '$%%&+ $)

29 :8 =.$00'<97.> >,2 Structure of the contribution proposal of objectives proposal of a conceptual framework choices made in Belgium some international issues 2 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Objectives to be reached be able to electronically - identify all relevant entities (physical persons, companies, applications, machines, ) - know the relevant characteristics of the entities - know that an entity has been mandated by another entity to perform a legal action - know the authorizations of the entities in a sufficiently certain and secure way in as much relations as possible (C2C, C2B, C2G, B2B, B2G, ) using open interoperability standards 3 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ $8

30 Conceptual framework entity: someone or something that has to be identified (e.g. a physical person, a company, a computer application, ) attribute: a piece of information about an entity identity: a number or a set of attributes of an entity that allows to know precisely who or what the entity is; an entity has only one identity, but this identity can be determined by several numbers or sets of attributes characteristic: an attribute of an entity, other than an attribute determining its identity, such as a capacity, a function, a professional qualification,...; an entity can have several characteristics 4 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Conceptual framework mandate: a right granted by an identified entity to another identified entity to perform well-defined legal actions in her name and for her account registration: the process of determining the identity, a characteristic or a mandate of an entity with sufficient certainty, before putting at the disposal means by which the identity can be authenticated, or the characteristic or the mandate can be verified 5 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ $'

31 Conceptual framework authentication of the identity: the process of checking whether the identity that an entity pretends to have, corresponds to the real identity; authentication of the identity can be done based on the verification of knowledge (e.g. a password), of possession (e.g. an electronic card), of biometrical characteristics or on a combination of those 6 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Conceptual framework verification of a characteristic or a mandate: the process of checking whether a characteristic or a mandate that an entity pretends to have, corresponds to a real characteristic or mandate of that entity; the verification of a characteristic or a mandate can be done by the same kind of means as those used for the authentication of the identity, or, after the authentication of the identity, by consulting a database that contains information about characteristics of mandates related to identified entities 7 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ %

32 Conceptual framework authorization: a permission to an entity to perform a defined action or to use a defined service authorization group: a group of authorizations role: a group of authorizations or authorization groups related to a specific service role based access: a method of assigning authorizations to entities by means of authorization groups and roles, in order to simplify the management of authorizations and their assignment to entities 8 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Choices made in Belgium identification number for every citizen and every company - characterictics unicity one entity one identification number same identification number is not assigned to several entities exhaustivity every entity to be identified has an identification number stability through time identification number should not contain variable characterics of the identified entity identification number should not contain references to the identification number or characteristics of other entities identification number should not change when a quality or characteristic of the identified entity changes 9 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+

33 Choices made in Belgium art. 8, 7 Directive 95/46/EC: "Member States shall determine the conditions under which a national identification number or any other identifier of general application may be processed" - evolution towards meaningless identification numbers - unique identification numbers of citizens can only be used by instances authorized by a sectoral committee of the national privacy commission - patient identification number is a number derived from the unique number of the citizen - regulation on interconnection of personal data registration of the identity of citizens by the municipalities 10 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Choices made in Belgium registration of the identity of companies by company counters registration of characteristics and mandates relevant for egovernment by private or public bodies designated by government authentication of the identity of physical persons by the electronic identity card verification of characteristics and mandates relevant for egovernment preferably by consulting authentic databases multifunctional use of authentication and verification means authorization is the responsibility of each service provider 11 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ $

34 Choices made in Belgium overall policy on security and privacy protection for egovernment - security, integrity and confidentiality of government information are ensured by integrating ICT measures with structural, organizational, physical, personnel screening and other security measures according to agreed policies - personal information is only used for purposes compatible with the purposes of the collection of the information - personal information is only accessible to authorized institutions and users according to business needs, legislative or policy requirements 12 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 Choices made in Belgium overall policy on security and privacy protection for egovernment - the authorizations for government bodies to communicate personal information to third parties are granted by sectoral committees of the privacy commission, designated by Parliament, after having checked whether the communication conditions (e.g. purpose limitation, proportionality) are met - the authorizations for communication are public - every concrete electronic communication of personal information by a government body is preventively checked on compliance with the existing authorizations by an independent institution managing the interoperability framework used for the communication - every concrete electronic communication of personal information by a government body is logged, to be able to trace possible abuse afterwards 13 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+

35 Choices made in Belgium overall policy on security and privacy protection for egovernment - every time information is used to take a decision, the used information is communicated to the concerned person together with the decision - every person has right to access and correct his own personal data - this system has been implemented in the Belgian social security sector for 10 years and is being extended to the whole Belgian government sector 14 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 International context: some issues determination of the means by which an entity can be identified within each country and across countries the way identity management and characteristics management are well separated in order to guarantee the multifunctional use of identity authentication means the quality insurance criteria for the registration procedures that are used to determine the identity, relevant characteristics or mandates before linking it to authentication or verification means the quality insurance criteria for authentication and verification means and their use 15 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ #

36 International context: some issues an organizational, functional and technical interoperability framework to exchange identity, characteristics, mandate and authentication data based on open standards the necessary legal framework for identity, characteristics and mandate management, with a good balance between trust enhancing measures and measures guaranteeing a free market 16 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 International context: proposed method to work out a common conceptual framework, a common vision and common basic principles to translate these principles in common, measurable objectives to ask every state to develop an action plan to achieve these objectives to elaborate an architecture and guidebooks to implement the principles to create a forum for the exchange of best practices 17 Frank Robben Leuven, 4 May 2005 *!" '$%%&+ &

37 0 (1 2 $? 4 4$ 4 /!!.+0! 5!0 9J1FJF (+!! 9!.90 <!0+0!+= I2!!NO.M 0!L!!2 ' 1 1 $ $ 71 $ $5/ 7 $:8 9+!10M ' 81 1 $ M 7! M! ; <+ =.M $ $ ;1< ( $ $9 I$2!! NOM! 0!:!0 L!!2. $ 1 7 $ $ 9! 0+!0 <= $ 9C+! ;20!!0!M7 +! B!M 3 ( ; ( < $ 7($ $ $ 9!!!M I2!!!(@M 0-! 0 (@<(@=L!!2 = $ 9,!;0!!!! <7= 0!!! +!!!!+!!0! (@!!B!C0! M 2 $= 1-9(@0!! 60 M *!" '$%%&+ 4

38 4# 4& 44?* I#2C0 "M 7++!.L!!2 / $ $$ 1 9 +!0! M*9 +!0!0+FM > $7 $ $ > $$ $ 7 ( 9, 9 +!!! 0!!!!!0!! M I&2F0++(9M ; ;! 0!L!!2.1$ $ $ $ $ 1?2@ $19! 0++9!!:! 1 $$ 71 7 $ $ 9 I426M 0L!!2 2 7 $ $ 1= 5 $ *+!L!++!! L! + $ 7 7$ $ 9!! / + C! + B! -!+ -,!!<7=! ;!1!! 7! + + 0!!,!;!!!!0! 0!09!!!9 0! :!0 "!+! ;!0+!! 0!;0!!!!!!,!!0!0!!! +!!!.! *!" '$%%&+ )

39 4$ 4$$ 4$ 4$# I2!!! +!!0!!!+!!! 0! C0+0!!!!!!6+!!!.! $ $ $ 7-9,!9.! <+ 0!! =! <+!! =!!!! I$2 -!F!;+!9 '( 7 $7 $ 71 9!+! ; C0+!! F +!! +,! 9 00! M $7 "7 9-0!!<+!!=M I27 "!! > 8 1/$$ $1 $$ $ $? $ $@ $$ $ 1$ 9,! 2! +!!!+!!!! 9! 9 7!!! 0 <!= 9 +!!! 0! I#2!2 0 2 $1 $ $$9!+!M,!!++!;(!2!F! M 8 71$ $$$ / +!; 0 0!! ( <(= +!! ; +!!!(F,!; 0!!!! *!" '$%%&+ 8

40 4$& 4$4 4$) 4$8 A $71 $ 1 $ 7 (= $9 + 0! 0 M,!(! 9! +!! 0! B7 ;!!0 M!<=M I&29 2 $ 7 $ 2" $ 9*;1+!;+! 0!!6<+ 0! F =! 6 0! MC0M $ - B2" 3 $B 7? I42/ & 7$ 71$$?$7$ 1@ 7$ $ $ $ <0!+!*!+0!!0! 0 =M 2 $ 7$ $1? $ $@ 1 $ 1 $ $$$ 9 I)23,!7 0!7 +!!!<! 9!*!= =$.7 $ $ 7 $ $ 71 * 9 +! 0 +* / +0!!!! M C? $ $ $ $$ $$ $$(1 $$ 7-9 I82",! ;2 <.+ +!!= 1 $ 7 $ $=$ $ D 5 $ $9 $ $ 7=$ 1-2" ( 99 2 Y *!" '$%%&+ '

41 0 ;!. C0 0!! M 7 +! +! $ $ ,!+ 0! 0 ;!!<= 4$' I'21!! 1! 7 0!!!! <!B= - 1 $ $ $ 7 $ 7 9 4$% I%2"! "0 0! ' $$ $ 7 <+!00! +!!=M.7 9? 4 4$ 4 6 I2!NO!M ' ;1<1 $ $ 9 1 $ F + 1! ;<+ + G= ;M C0 0! 0! < +!+ G=M7!M I$2!N O!M ' ;1<9!!<!=!! M $ 9! B!!F M ' 1 0!! +! + + ;GM I2!NO M > $$ 17 $ $1?2@9!! M > $ $1 1 $ 9!! <!0 + G= 0!! M 3 ( ; ( < $ 7($ 7 9 *!" '$%%&+ #%

42 > 1 $ $1=$ $1=9! +6/GM 4# I#2C0 M 2 $ $18 7$(1 $?@9 0-! 0 (1@+ M ' 7 $ =$ 9!!! <7=! +! 7! M! 7!!BBB1 M ' 29 +!! 1 < = M!!M! M!M ' 2 9+0!!!!M!! M!!!!!M 0!), I&2!M $ 97!! ;M C! B!! M C0!!! M 7 +! B!M ' 81 19!;++ ++1M '1 19 B!M7 0!! M ' $ $ $ 1 ( (9 1 M 0!)0 I42C0M > 7 $$(?$@$ $1$ $ 19 C! 11! M 11 MC0! <+ 7 = M 1! M '1 19 B!M7 0!! M!!B ;0 M ' $ $ $ 9!! <=.<=+./</=+ +/ M!!!BM ' $$ 29C0!!! M +!! <(K=! M!!(KM C0 (K!+0! B!M *!" '$%%&+ #

43 4) 48 I)2C00!M 7<!=!.,!!. 7 > *9 +!0! 0 + F M C0! 0!!!B!! M B0!!M ' 9!.+ + G ++ G!M '$ $ $ > 1 1 ( $$$ 1 $ 9!!!M I82C0!!M 7!!! 01!! > ( $9+!0!!9!!M 4' I'2C0!M > $$1 $ $ 9!0!!9!!M 1/ $ $ 1 7$1 $$ 79 +! + + 0!! +!!!!!! B!++!B!(KM $$(= $$ $ !!! M 4% I%20!M 2 $ $ 1 9+0! <= (@M ' (1 $1 2 9 ' $ 2 $= $$? 1@ o E29 o A $ 2 (9 '1 71.$ - 7 9!0!1M *!" '$%%&+ #$

44 4 I2/ $ 9+0! <!+! G=!!M '7$ 9+! <+ =+ BBBM ' $ 7$ 9!! +! M '7 $ 7$ 9!! M *!" '$%%&+ #

45 71D,!, /1%%%3+/!2BB000 B 1 B $ $ +/ (5 2/(!2BB000 B 5 2?!2BB000 7$ $ D,!+7<71,= 2"!(!!2BB0001 7$ $ D 30L,30 +/ C2?!2BB0000 For further information about the egovernment Unit European Commission Information Society and Media Directorate-General egovernment Unit Tel (32-2) Fax (32-2) EC-egovernment-research@cec.eu.int Website europa.eu.int/egovernment_research