Multi-Factor ************** *******
*** ******* ***** **** more **** *** ********** must ** ********* ** order ** **** ******. However, *** *********** *** 'layered' ** * *** that **** ********** **** other.
Four ************ *******
*** ********** ************** '*******' cannot ** *** ** the **** ***** *** are ********* ********** ******* types ** ***********. *** 'factor ******' *** ******** cited **:
- ********* *** **** ***: * **********/********** ******* administratively ** *** ****. Typically ** ****** ******* badge, *****, ** ***. Also ******** * ********** key, ********** **, ** passport.
- ********* *** **** *****: ********* * **** or ******** **** ******* by *** ****. ********* a *** ******, *** also ******* '******** *********' or '**** * ****** Security *****' *************.
- ********* *** **** **: ********* ******** **** the **** ** **** to *******. ********* ****** or **** ****** *** used, *** ***** ******** possible ********* **** ***********, heartbeats, ******/**** *****, *** even ****.
- ******* ******* ******** *** User: ***** ******* **********, another ***** ********** *** and ******* *** *** user. **** ***** ** a ****** ***** ** even * ************ **** grants ****** ***** ** familiarity.
Multiple ******* ********** ************
**** ** ***** ** securing ******, *********** **** a ***** ****. **** it ***** ** ******** credentials *** ******** **** the ***** ****** *** using ****, ******** ******* are ****** **** ** the ******** ******* *** weak.
* ******** ******* ** many *** ***-****** ***** and **** **** *** automatic ****** ********. **** credential, **** **** *****, is **** *** ****** defeated ** ****** *** malicious ***.
*******, **** ** ******** do *** ******* ********* embedded *****, ***** *** card ** ********* ******** with * ********* ***.
** *** ****, *** only *** ***** ***** required ** ** ******, but *** ******* *** required ** ** *******. This ***** ************ ****** factors ******** ** ********* them **** ******** ****** of **************.
Multi-Factor *******
** * **** ***** reader ******** ********* *****, fingerprint *****, *** ****** codes *** '*****-******' *******, two ** **** *********** would ** ******** *** entry, *** **** ********* credential ****** *** ********** for *** **** ** present ** *** ****.
*** ***** ***** ***** an ******* ** * typical '***** ******' ****** device:
*** ******* **** ******* support ****. *** *******, this *****-****** ****** ****************** ********* **** ***/** voice ************** ******* ** the **** ****** ***********:
Different *****
*** ****** ****** ** applied ******* **** ********* to ** ***-****'* ******** concerns. ***** ****** ********* about *** ******** *** of **** *********** *** require *** *******, ***** high-security ************* *** ******* three ** ****. ** define *** ******* ***** tiers *****:
Two *******
**** ***** * *********** of '********* *** **** ***' *** '********* ** *****', **** ** ****** Control ****** **** *** accompanying *** ******. **** if *** **** ***** the ****, ** ************ finder ****** *** ** to **** ****** ****** they **** **** * code, ***** ** ***** only ** *** ****.
******* *********** ********** ****** are **** *********, ** is **** ****** ** see *********** ** ***** physiological ******* **** **'********* *** **** **' ** *** ****** authentication.
Three *******
**** ******** ******** ** even ****** ***** ** validation, ***** ******* *** required. **** ***** **** is * *********** ** biometrics, *** *****, *** access ******* ***********, *** become ************* **** ****** to ********* *** ****** than ****** '****** ******' authentication.
** * ****** ** both **** *** **** to *** **** ***** of **************, ** ** used ** ******** **************, military, *** ******** ********** but *** ********* *** commercial ***-*****.
Guard/Verification ******
*** ******* ***** ** authentication ** ***** **** at ******** *** ***** sensitive *********, ***** ****** checkpoints *** **** ** conjunction **** *** ***** factors. ******* **** ******* takes *** **** **** and ** *** **** labor *********, ** ********* is *** ******** ****** the ******** **** ** very **** *** ******** manpower ** *********.
Multi-Factor ************** *********
******* ******** ****** ************ of *****, *****-****** ************** has *********.
*** ******* *********** *** is *** ********** **** required ** ******* ** manipulate *** ********** **********. Especially *** ******** ***** high ***** ******* *** needed, ****** **** **** to ******* **** *** additional ****** ***** *** more **** * *** seconds *** **** ****, potentially ****** ** ** many ******* **** *** course ** *** *****.
******* ********* ****** ** the ********* ***** ** multiple ****** ******* **** simple, ****** ****** ***** like *********** *******. * combination *****-****** ****** ** often $*** - $*,*** more **** * ******-****** unit ******* $*** - $300. **** *** ****** of **** * ***** system **** * - 4 *****, ***** *****-****** readers *** ******** ***** by *********.
Single ****** ***** ******
* ******** ** ********** access ******* ******* *** 'single ******' **************, *** this ** ********** *** the *********** ******** ** most ***-*****. *** ****** credential **** ** **** is **** ** *** identity ** *** ******, and *** ****** ******** (ie: *******, *****) ** recorded *** **** ******.
*** *********** *** ******* the **** ****** '****** factor' **********. ** ***** verification ** *** ****** is ******** **** *** key *** **** ******. While ********* ******** ** high-tech ********** ****** ***********, mechanical **** ***** ******* an ******** '***** *****' of ******** *** **** millions ** **********.
*** ***** *******, ***** multiple ******* ** ****** identity *** ** **** to *******. ******* ******* supporting ***** ****** *** more *********, *** ****** manned ************ ***** ** overhead *** ****** ********* without ******** *************, ****** factor ******* *** ******** method ****. *******, **** risks **********, ***** ** an ********** ********** ** strengthen ********.
Comments (25)
Undisclosed #1
IMHO what's missing from this is MFA via mobile device. Smartphones and provide biometric, pin & gesture as the what you are or what you know. The phone is what you have. There are several companies that offer this now with some really interesting implementations.
All of them eliminate the need for costly biometric readers, and typically allow the administrator the ability to require MFA by group/person, door/area and schedule.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #1
Agreed when the solution makes you rub your phone against a reader, but there are implementations where you don't even need to take your phone out of your pocket and others where you can make your request as you approach the door in a more natural way.
Create New Topic
Fabian Muyawa
IPVMU Certified | 12/11/18 02:54pm
Where do we place Video when it is integrated with access control in the case of maglocks with embedded cameras and or cctv cameras tied to particular doors to verify who has accessed a room.
Does this qualify to be a another form of credential.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #3
Mobile credential implementations are clearly on the rise as over 1 million end users have registered and used their phone to securely gain access to their hotel room, data centers or office doors. Biggest issue...behavior & habit change. If we use our phones for our personal use, we don't mind opening up an App, but when it is required by the company to authenticate a person to the device and the device to the system, resistance to change is noted in pilots. On the other hand, I'm not going to wear my phone on a lanyard all day.
Create New Topic
John Bredehoft
12/11/18 07:09pm
Does the fourth factor need to be a person? For example, if someone with the correct badge, PIN, and biometric appeared at the door at 7:48am, could an AI algorithm deduce that this behavior is consistent with how the person usually behaves?
Or would that be more of a behavioral biometric, and thus classified as "something you are"?
Create New Topic
Undisclosed End User #4
The Guard Verification/Someone trusted verifies user type doesn't necessarily need to be labor intensive. For instance, Gallagher Command Centre has a feature where you can set up 'challenges' on doors, where the guard at the command centre gets notified somebody has badged at the door, and give the guard a set amount of time to grant or deny the request. It can show a live camera feed with optional 2 way audio, as well as any Personal Data Fields, such as photos, that you program it to. As long as you already have a person monitoring the access control system and don't put it on doors that gets constant traffic it can be very manageable.
Additionally there are ways you can program Gallagher so there needs to be 2 different cardholders badging together to open a door, or a "host" type cardholder needs to badge first for a "visitor" type cardholder to be able to scan their badge and get a green light.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #5
I understand everyone opinion and I see what your all saying, wouldn’t it be simpler to have an access schedule for the main door if persons are not allowed to be at work before and after a set time and set the system to email an alert to the relevant persons which would contain the card holder information and yes the video to verify if it is the actual access card holder.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #1
Ok this is for eveyone's entertainment. We work in a co-working space, the doors have access control. One of the doors in particular often had a rock holding the door open. So you'd think building management would try to put a stop to it. Nope, this appeared the other day...
Note that they even included the instructions...
Create New Topic
Scott Fischer
IPVMU Certified | 10/21/19 07:05pm
I suggest changing the fourth verification factor and updating the list as follows:
1. Something the user has
2. Something the user knows
3. Something the user is
4. Someone the user is with
The original statement "Someone Trusted Verifies the User" suggests another human positively IDs and vouches for the user and grants access based on familiarity. I suggest the guard or receptionist listed in this example is actually acting in the same capacity as a multi-factor reader (identifying the individual based on what they have, know, or are). The guard or receptionist is therefore not a "verification factor" in the same sense as the other three items on the list.
Changing the 4th factor to "Someone the user is with" references implementation of multiple user authentication requirements (i.e. the "buddy system") where two (or more) authorized individuals are required before access to a location or system is granted.
Create New Topic
Scott Fischer
IPVMU Certified | 10/21/19 08:03pm
Responding to Undisclosed #6:
Requiring two or more authorized users before granting access is an example of "Someone the user is with". For example, Person A cannot enter a restricted area unless another authorized individual (Person B or C or D etc.) is also present (could be any additional authorized person). Each individual must be verified separately prior to the pair being granted access. Either one trying to gain access alone would not be able to gain access even though they are authorized.
A guard granting access to Person A is the same as a card reader granting access to Person A. They both verify the identity of Person A and grant access based on his/her authorization level. "Someone the user is with" requires authorized Person A to have an authorized Person B with them prior to the guard (or card reader) granting access. The guard (or card reader) performs the verification that Person A and Person B are both authorized individuals and that together they meet the criteria to be granted access.
Create New Topic
Ng Choy Mei
interesting article
Create New Topic
Ng Choy Mei
An insightful article.
Create New Topic
Charng Haw Guo
Interesting - an eye-opening for me in Multi-Factors Access Control Authentication
Create New Topic
John Price
Could the fourth factor be something as simple as a smart ring or smart watch that is coded different then a card credential
Create New Topic
John Price
If you have an iris reader will eye contacts interfere or cause false scans
Create New Topic