Single Sign-On Access

Points: 80

Assignment 2: Single Sign-On Access

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 70% F

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Analyze at least five (5) problems experienced by employees in an enterprise where Single Sign-On (SSO) has not been implemented.

Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed at least five (5) problems experienced by employees in an enterprise where Single Sign-On (SSO) has not been implemented.

Partially analyzed at least five (5) problems experienced by employees in an enterprise where Single Sign-On (SSO) has not been implemented.

Satisfactorily analyzed at least five (5) problems experienced by employees in an enterprise where Single Sign-On (SSO) has not been implemented.

Thoroughly analyzed at least five (5) problems experienced by employees in an enterprise where Single Sign-On (SSO) has not been implemented.

2. Analyze the advantages and disadvantages of using AD for SSO access. Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using AD for SSO access.

Partially analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using AD for SSO access.

Satisfactorily analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using AD for SSO access.

Thoroughly analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using AD for SSO access.

3. Analyze the advantages and disadvantages of using LADP for SSO access.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using LADP for SSO access.

Partially analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using LADP for SSO access.

Satisfactorily analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using LADP for SSO access.

Thoroughly analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of using LADP for SSO access.

4a. Compare and contrast a Kerberos- based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of configurability.

Weight: 5%

Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of configurability.

Partially compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of configurability.

Satisfactorily compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of configurability.

Thoroughly compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of configurability.

4b. Compare and contrast a Kerberos- based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of established standards.

Weight: 5%

Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of established standards.

Partially compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of established standards.

Satisfactorily compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of established standards.

Thoroughly compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of established standards.

4c. Compare and contrast a Kerberos- based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of implementation challenges.

Weight: 5%

Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of implementation challenges.

Partially compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of implementation challenges.

Satisfactorily compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of implementation challenges.

Thoroughly compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of implementation challenges.

4d. Compare and contrast a Kerberos- based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of cost.

Weight: 5%

Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of cost.

Partially compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of cost.

Satisfactorily compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of cost.

Thoroughly compared and contrasted a Kerberos-based SSO configuration to a Smart card based configuration in terms of cost.

5. 3 references 

Weight: 5%

No references provided

Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 6 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present