Construct · 2 fields · 5 citations

Where does authentication collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, two constructs Nearest construct by meaningauthenticitycompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to authentication is authenticity.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

authentication2 CONSTRUCTSSecuritySP 800-63B · LAMPORTEvidence lawFRE 901 · 902

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

1981Security2017Evidence law
2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Information security

establishing confidence that a claimant is who they say, by checking something they know, have, or are.

The process of establishing confidence that a claimant is who they say they are, by checking something they know, something they have, or something they are. NIST SP 800-63B fixed the current vocabulary in 2017: an authenticator is presented to a verifier, and assurance rises with the number of independent factors. Lamport's 1981 one-way hash chain solved the problem that a stored password table can be read, and Bonneau, Herley, van Oorschot, and Stajano's 2012 comparison of thirty-five schemes against twenty-five usability, deployability, and security properties explained why none of them has displaced the password. What distinguishes this meaning is that authentication is a yes-or-no protocol outcome about a claim, and it says nothing about whether the identity behind the claim is worth trusting.[1][2][3]

Unit
A claimant and a verifier, over one session or transaction
Recovery means
Re-authentication after a failed or expired session; credential reset after compromise
Measured by
Authenticator assurance level; false accept and false reject rates; factor count

Evidence law

Authentication as a threshold showing that an exhibit is what it purports to be

The proponent's showing that an item of evidence is what the proponent claims it is. Federal Rule of Evidence 901(a) fixed the test in 1975 as evidence sufficient to support a finding, a low bar of conditional relevance that leaves the final question of genuineness to the jury, and 901(b) lists illustrative methods from a witness with knowledge to distinctive characteristics. Rule 902 lists items that authenticate themselves, and the 2017 additions of 902(13) and 902(14) let certified records and copies of electronic data come in on a certification. Grimm, Capra, and Joseph's 2017 article worked through how the old methods apply to emails, texts, social-media posts, and web pages. What distinguishes this meaning is that authentication is a gate on admissibility, not a finding of truth; a forged letter is authenticated once someone testifies that it is the letter found in the drawer.[4][5]

Unit
One exhibit offered by one party at trial
Recovery means
Not applicable, an excluded exhibit can be re-offered with a better foundation
Measured by
Whether a prima facie foundation was laid; rulings under 901 and 902; jury findings of genuineness
Scales indexed for this construct
  • Foundation for authentication under Rule 901(a) (FRE 901(a)) elementsFederal Rules of Evidence, Rules 901–902 · what the proponent must show before the court admits an exhibit, leaving the ultimate question of genuineness to the fact-finder3 items

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

Combine items across the authentication scales to see whether the meanings separate empirically, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

authenticity5 fields · 5 citationsjingle · one word, five constructsidentity6 fields · 14 citationsjingle · one name, six constructsintegrity5 fields · 14 citationsjingle · one word, five constructs

References

  1. Grassi, P. A., Fenton, J. L., Newton, E. M., Perlner, R. A., Regenscheid, A. R., Burr, W. E., Richer, J. P., Lefkovitz, N. B., Danker, J. M., Choong, Y.-Y., Greene, K. K., & Theofanos, M. F. (2017). Digital identity guidelines: Authentication and lifecycle management (NIST Special Publication 800-63B). National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-63b
  2. Lamport, L. (1981). Password authentication with insecure communication. Communications of the ACM, 24(11), 770–772. https://doi.org/10.1145/358790.358797
  3. Bonneau, J., Herley, C., van Oorschot, P. C., & Stajano, F. (2012). The quest to replace passwords: A framework for comparative evaluation of web authentication schemes. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (pp. 553–567). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2012.44
  4. Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 901–902 (2017 amendments).
  5. Grimm, P. W., Capra, D. J., & Joseph, G. P. (2017). Authenticating digital evidence. Baylor Law Review, 69(1), 1–55.

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct