基于关系访问控制的共有资源策略协商

Pooya Mehregan, Philip W. L. Fong
{"title":"基于关系访问控制的共有资源策略协商","authors":"Pooya Mehregan, Philip W. L. Fong","doi":"10.1145/2914642.2914652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The collaborative nature of content development has given rise to the novel problem of multiple ownership in access control, such that a shared resource is administrated simultaneously by co-owners who may have conflicting privacy preferences and/or sharing needs. Prior work has focused on the design of unsupervised conflict resolution mechanisms. Driven by the need for human consent in organizational settings, this paper explores interactive policy negotiation, an approach complementary to that of prior work. Specifically, we propose an extension of Relationship-Based Access Control (ReBAC) to support multiple ownership, in which a policy negotiation protocol is in place for co-owners to come up with and give consent to an access control policy in a structured manner. During negotiation, the draft policy is assessed by formally defined availability criteria: to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. We devised two algorithms for verifying policy satisfiability, both employing a modern SAT solver for solving subproblems. The performance is found to be adequate for mid-sized organizations.","PeriodicalId":388649,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 21st ACM on Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy Negotiation for Co-owned Resources in Relationship-Based Access Control\",\"authors\":\"Pooya Mehregan, Philip W. L. Fong\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2914642.2914652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The collaborative nature of content development has given rise to the novel problem of multiple ownership in access control, such that a shared resource is administrated simultaneously by co-owners who may have conflicting privacy preferences and/or sharing needs. Prior work has focused on the design of unsupervised conflict resolution mechanisms. Driven by the need for human consent in organizational settings, this paper explores interactive policy negotiation, an approach complementary to that of prior work. Specifically, we propose an extension of Relationship-Based Access Control (ReBAC) to support multiple ownership, in which a policy negotiation protocol is in place for co-owners to come up with and give consent to an access control policy in a structured manner. During negotiation, the draft policy is assessed by formally defined availability criteria: to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. We devised two algorithms for verifying policy satisfiability, both employing a modern SAT solver for solving subproblems. The performance is found to be adequate for mid-sized organizations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":388649,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 21st ACM on Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 21st ACM on Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2914642.2914652\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 21st ACM on Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2914642.2914652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

内容开发的协作性导致了访问控制中多重所有权的新问题,例如共享资源由可能具有相互冲突的隐私偏好和/或共享需求的共同所有者同时管理。先前的工作集中在无监督冲突解决机制的设计上。在组织设置中需要人类同意的驱动下,本文探讨了交互式政策谈判,这是一种对先前工作的补充。具体来说,我们建议对基于关系的访问控制(ReBAC)进行扩展,以支持多重所有权,其中为共同所有者提供策略协商协议,以便以结构化的方式提出并同意访问控制策略。在协商过程中,根据正式定义的可用性标准对策略草案进行评估:到多项式层次结构的第二级。我们设计了两种验证策略可满足性的算法,两者都采用现代SAT求解器来求解子问题。对于中等规模的组织来说,该性能是足够的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Policy Negotiation for Co-owned Resources in Relationship-Based Access Control
The collaborative nature of content development has given rise to the novel problem of multiple ownership in access control, such that a shared resource is administrated simultaneously by co-owners who may have conflicting privacy preferences and/or sharing needs. Prior work has focused on the design of unsupervised conflict resolution mechanisms. Driven by the need for human consent in organizational settings, this paper explores interactive policy negotiation, an approach complementary to that of prior work. Specifically, we propose an extension of Relationship-Based Access Control (ReBAC) to support multiple ownership, in which a policy negotiation protocol is in place for co-owners to come up with and give consent to an access control policy in a structured manner. During negotiation, the draft policy is assessed by formally defined availability criteria: to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. We devised two algorithms for verifying policy satisfiability, both employing a modern SAT solver for solving subproblems. The performance is found to be adequate for mid-sized organizations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信