Zero Trust Federation: Sharing Context under User Control towards Zero Trust in Identity Federation
Open accessAbstract
Perimeter models, which provide access control for protecting resources on networks, make authorization decisions using the source network of access requests as one of critical factors. However, such models are problematic because once a network is intruded, the attacker gains access to all of its resources. To overcome the above problem, a Zero Trust Network (ZTN) is proposed as a new security model in which access control is performed by authenticating users who request access and then authorizing such requests using various information about users and devices called contexts. To correctly make authorization decisions, this model must take a large amount of various contexts into account. However, in some cases, an access control mechanism cannot collect enough context to make decisions, e.g., when an organization that enforces access control joins the identity federation and uses systems operated by other organizations. This is because the contexts collected using the systems are stored in individual systems and no federation exists for sharing contexts. In this study, we propose the concept of a Zero Trust Federation (ZTF), which applies the concept of ZTN under the identity federation, and a method for sharing context among systems of organizations. Since context is sensitive to user privacy, we also propose a mechanism for sharing contexts under user control. We also verify context sharing by implementing a ZTF prototype.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Mandal et al. proposed a cloud-based zero trust access control strategy by establishing a MAC spoofing defense mechanism in the SDN framework of the cloud architecture to support the work-from-home approach driven by COVID-19.
“In the same year, Mandal [41] et al. proposed a cloud-based zero trust access control strategy by establishing a MAC spoofing defense mechanism in the SDN framework of the cloud architecture to support the work-from-home approach driven by COVID-19.”
From A Survey on Zero Trust Architecture: Challenges and Future Trends (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Hatakeyama et al.'s model does not standardize the format and semantics of the context in ZTF and cannot operate the authorization server and the identifier used when the context cannot be shared.
“However, it does not standardize the format and semantics of the context in ZTF and cannot operate the authorization server and the identifier used when the context cannot be shared.”
From A Survey on Zero Trust Architecture: Challenges and Future Trends (2022) · cites this paper as [40]
Cites
Rose, S., Borchert, O., Mitchell, S., & Connelly, S. (2020) · doi:10.6028/nist.sp.800-207 · Cited by 1,174 · see citing works
Frank, M., Biedert, R., Ma, E., Martinovic, I., & Song, D. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2012.2225048 · Cited by 844 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on Zero Trust Architecture: Challenges and Future Trends
He, Y., Huang, D., Chen, L., Ni, Y., & Ma, X. (2022) · Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing · doi:10.1155/2022/6476274 · Cited by 260 · see citing works
“[40] proposed a new access control model for zero trust networks, which does not assume trusted properties such as source networks.”
Background
- Authors
- Hatakeyama, K., Kotani, D., & Okabe, Y.
- Affiliations
- Kyoto University (JP)
- Venue
- 2021 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops and other Affiliated Events (PerCom Workshops)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-03-22
- Pages
- 514-519
- OpenAlex
- W3166178256
- Semantic Scholar
- 4106ae148391bc0806dcb8a79f49c88cfc88d66e
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 17.33
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops) (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
- Kyoto University Research Information Repository (Kyoto University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Authentication Protocols Security
- Keywords
- identity federation, context sharing, user control, context-aware access control, user privacy, authorization decisions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review