This is a Identity Theft Risks Balanced Scorecard Report, it is one of reports that Balanced Scorecard Designer can generate for Identity Theft Risks scorecard. With this software you can also design your own KPIs, Balanced Scorecards and metrics.


Identity Privacy Risks

Report includes: 1 month(s) 49 day(s), from 05.04.2008 to 24.05.2008

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Contains
Root Identity Privacy Risks 51,88 % 37,52 % -14,36 %
Computer protection (47,2%, -25,9%Down)
Identity information structure(66,8%, 31,83%Up)
Process efficiency(27,9%, -14,6%Down)
Staff effectiveness(31,2%, -26,31%Down)
Financial Perspective(14,4%, -36,85%Down)

Graph for Identity Privacy Risks

Graph for Identity Privacy Risks

Data for Identity Privacy Risks

DatesValue
05.04.200851,88
12.04.200841,02
19.04.200833,21
26.04.200853,54
03.05.200843,35
10.05.200850,26
17.05.200848,85
24.05.200837,52

Computer protection

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Parent Contains
Root Computer protection 73,15 % 47,25 % -25,9% Identity Privacy Risks
Indicators
System compliance
Incident Forensics

Graph for Computer protection

Graph for Computer protection

Data for Computer protection

DatesValueWeight
05.04.200873,151
12.04.200858,81
19.04.200833,71
26.04.200837,251
03.05.200827,051
10.05.200830,71
17.05.200834,751
24.05.200847,251

System compliance

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root System compliance 56,16 32,8 -23,36 % Maximize Computer protection
Description Number of users and network devices that are security policy compliant, divided by the total number of users/devices on the network, multiplied by 100

Graph for System compliance

Graph for System compliance

Data for System compliance

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081109056,16
12.04.20081109028,88
19.04.20081109016,64
26.04.20081109033,36
03.05.20081109050,08
10.05.20081109024,64
17.05.20081109014,24
24.05.20081109032,8

Incident Forensics

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Incident Forensics 12,98 28,8 + 15,82 % Minimize Computer protection
Description The number of incidents attributable to policy failures divided by the total number of incidents, multiplied by 100

Graph for Incident Forensics

Graph for Incident Forensics

Data for Incident Forensics

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.2008157512,98
12.04.200815759,2
19.04.2008157533,63
26.04.2008157543,29
03.05.2008157572,2
10.05.2008157544,83
17.05.2008157530,06
24.05.2008157528,8

Identity information structure

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Parent Contains
Root Identity information structure 34,97 % 66,8 % + 31,83% Identity Privacy Risks
Indicators
Identity repository size
Secured objects
Provisioning process coverage
Identity assurance *
* - Information for this metric is limited in sample report

Graph for Identity information structure

Graph for Identity information structure

Data for Identity information structure

DatesValueWeight
05.04.200834,971
12.04.200858,851
19.04.200842,251
26.04.200855,821
03.05.200838,281
10.05.200854,91
17.05.200847,521
24.05.200866,81

Identity repository size

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Identity repository size 1,452 2,948 + 1,496 % Maximize Identity information structure
Description The total number of accounts, groups, and other objects of interest clustered by the identity provider or relying party
Target description 1-small, 2-medium, 3-large

Graph for Identity repository size

Graph for Identity repository size

Data for Identity repository size

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081131,452
12.04.20081132,572
19.04.20081132,408
26.04.20081132,034
03.05.20081131,254
10.05.20081131,494
17.05.20081131,394
24.05.20081132,948

Secured objects

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Secured objects 62,47 40,96 -21,51 % Maximize Identity information structure
Description The number of accounts, groups, and other objects
of interest with a sufficient level of security divided by the total number of accounts, groups, and other objects of interest clustered by the identity provider or relying party, multiplied by 100

Graph for Secured objects

Graph for Secured objects

Data for Secured objects

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.200811010062,47
12.04.200811010058,24
19.04.200811010049,06
26.04.200811010083,17
03.05.200811010054,82
10.05.200811010088,3
17.05.200811010074,26
24.05.200811010040,96

Provisioning process coverage

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Provisioning process coverage 25,04 63,44 + 38,4 % Maximize Identity information structure
Description The number of identity repositories and subjects the provisioning system governs, divided by the total number of repositories (including repositories that rely on custom or ad hoc provisioning processes), multiplied by 100

Graph for Provisioning process coverage

Graph for Provisioning process coverage

Data for Provisioning process coverage

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081109025,04
12.04.20081109043,12
19.04.20081109053,68
26.04.20081109031,6
03.05.20081109069,76
10.05.20081109034,32
17.05.20081109066
24.05.20081109063,44

Process efficiency

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Parent Contains
Root Process efficiency 42,52 % 27,92 % -14,6% Identity Privacy Risks
Indicators
Provisioning process efficiency
Authorization claims
Sensitive claims
Provisioning geodesics *
* - Information for this metric is limited in sample report

Graph for Process efficiency

Graph for Process efficiency

Data for Process efficiency

DatesValueWeight
05.04.200842,521
12.04.200820,951
19.04.200837,751
26.04.200856,621
03.05.200862,81
10.05.200865,61
17.05.200851,451
24.05.200827,921

Provisioning process efficiency

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Provisioning process efficiency 40,25 31,45 -8,8 % Maximize Process efficiency
Description The length of time from the initial request to the time the subject is
provisioned or terminated in the identity repository, compared with the industry best practices

Graph for Provisioning process efficiency

Graph for Provisioning process efficiency

Data for Provisioning process efficiency

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.200811012040,25
12.04.200811012021,55
19.04.200811012026,5
26.04.200811012043,55
03.05.200811012050,26
10.05.200811012072,04
17.05.200811012061,48
24.05.200811012031,45

Authorization claims

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Authorization claims 14,4 47,85 + 33,45 % Minimize Process efficiency
Description The number of rejected claims for authorization, divided by the total number of authorization claims, multiplied by 100

Graph for Authorization claims

Graph for Authorization claims

Data for Authorization claims

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.2008107514,4
12.04.2008107562,175
19.04.2008107563,375
26.04.2008107511,625
03.05.2008107530,375
10.05.2008107520,4
17.05.2008107528,65
24.05.2008107547,85

Sensitive claims

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Sensitive claims 62,625 56,925 -5,7 % Minimize Process efficiency
Description The number of claims whose release would injure the subject, identity provider, or relying party, divided by the total number of authorization claims, multiplied by 100

Graph for Sensitive claims

Graph for Sensitive claims

Data for Sensitive claims

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.2008107562,625
12.04.2008107539,6
19.04.2008107534,725
26.04.2008107529,475
03.05.200810755,775
10.05.2008107548,75
17.05.2008107536,075
24.05.2008107556,925

Staff effectiveness

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Parent Contains
Root Staff effectiveness 57,48 % 31,17 % -26,31% Identity Privacy Risks
Indicators
User account statistics
Identity proofing strength
Audit system usage
Policy compliance *
* - Information for this metric is limited in sample report

Graph for Staff effectiveness

Graph for Staff effectiveness

Data for Staff effectiveness

DatesValueWeight
05.04.200857,481
12.04.200825,621
19.04.200843,281
26.04.200869,821
03.05.200852,081
10.05.200859,321
17.05.200834,221
24.05.200831,171

User account statistics

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root User account statistics 349,35 544,2 + 194,8 % Minimize Staff effectiveness
Description The number of accounts associated with all users, divided by the total number of users, multiplied by 100

Graph for User account statistics

Graph for User account statistics

Data for User account statistics

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081150600349,35
12.04.20081150600360,15
19.04.20081150600158,1
26.04.20081150600267
03.05.20081150600483
10.05.20081150600168
17.05.20081150600592,35
24.05.20081150600544,2

Identity proofing strength

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Identity proofing strength 0,502 1,254 + 0,752 % Maximize Staff effectiveness
Description The strength of secrets used for each user authentication
Target description 0-low, 1-medium, 2-high

Graph for Identity proofing strength

Graph for Identity proofing strength

Data for Identity proofing strength

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081020,502
12.04.20081020,318
19.04.20081020,752
26.04.20081021,492
03.05.20081021,662
10.05.20081021,192
17.05.20081020,646
24.05.20081021,254

Audit system usage

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Audit system usage 62,29 38,17 -24,12 % Maximize Staff effectiveness
Description The number of successful user authentication events, divided by the total number of authentication events, multiplied by 100

Graph for Audit system usage

Graph for Audit system usage

Data for Audit system usage

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.200811010062,29
12.04.200811010033,58
19.04.200811010021,79
26.04.200811010056,98
03.05.200811010070,57
10.05.200811010055
17.05.200811010070,3
24.05.200811010038,17

Financial Perspective

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Parent Contains
Root Financial Perspective 51,3 % 14,45 % -36,85% Identity Privacy Risks
Indicators
Return on Security Investment
Collateral damage potential (CDP)

Graph for Financial Perspective

Graph for Financial Perspective

Data for Financial Perspective

DatesValueWeight
05.04.200851,31
12.04.200840,851
19.04.20089,11
26.04.200848,151
03.05.200836,551
10.05.200840,81
17.05.200876,31
24.05.200814,451

Return on Security Investment

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Return on Security Investment 39,88 12,34 -27,54 % Maximize Financial Perspective
Description The financial benefit of security investment divided by the cost of the investment, multipled by 100

Graph for Return on Security Investment

Graph for Return on Security Investment

Data for Return on Security Investment

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.200811010039,88
12.04.200811010032,41
19.04.200811010017,38
26.04.200811010066,34
03.05.200811010040,78
10.05.200811010057,34
17.05.200811010088,48
24.05.200811010012,34

Collateral damage potential (CDP)

  Name Start value End value Dynamic Measure units Optimization method Parent
Root Collateral damage potential (CDP) 2,082 0,789 -1,293 % Maximize Financial Perspective
Description The quantification of potential damage in physical assets, property as a result of a security breach
Target description 0-None, 1-low, 2-medium, 3-high

Graph for Collateral damage potential (CDP)

Graph for Collateral damage potential (CDP)

Data for Collateral damage potential (CDP)

DatesWeightMinMaxValue
05.04.20081032,082
12.04.20081031,704
19.04.20081030,3
26.04.20081031,011
03.05.20081031,167
10.05.20081030,87
17.05.20081031,962
24.05.20081030,789
Created by: AKS-Labs
Report created with Balanced Scorecard Designer at 28.04.2008 23:52:21

Copyright © 2000-2008 AKS-Labs. All rights reserved.