Identity Federation Survey Results (May 5, 2009)
This survey assumed the following definition of identity federation: Digitally trusting authentication, authorization, and/or other identity information coming from other security domains, with cross-domain single sign-on being a well-known example. 112 respondents began the survey; 103 respondents completed the survey. Responses appear in bold after the question, and have been reordered, where applicable, in descending order of response. The raw results are also available in full here.
1. Does your organization support identity federation? 87 yes (81.3%); 20 no (18.7%)
2. Which of the following do you support with your federation deployments (check all that apply)? view graphic
- SAML 2.0 browser single sign-on 65 (75.6%)
- SAML 1.x browser single sign-on 46 (53.5%)
- Other uses of SAML 19 (22.1%)
- OpenID 16 (18.6%)
- Other (see detail below) 13 (15.1%)
- WS-Federation 10 (11.6%)
- SPML 7 (8.1%)
- WS-Trust 6 (7.0%)
- XACML 5 (5.8%)
- Information Card 3 (3.5%)
OTHER DETAILED RESPONSES: 1) CAS (Central Authentication Service); 2) custom, in-house; 3) PAPI (a pre-SAML proprietary protocol); 4) Shibboleth; 5) Windows Live ID; 6) A-Select; 7) Biometric Speaker Verification; 8) POST Profile; 9) PKI FBCA and FiXs; 10) browser SSO via Pubcookie; 11) Proprietary formats required by our customer credit unions; 12) Facebook; 13) RFID; 14) Shibboleth; 15) Digital certificates