OASIS ACAL [XACML] TC

 View Only

Re: [xacml] 7.7 Obligations

  • 1.  Re: [xacml] 7.7 Obligations

    Posted 10-09-2002 14:26
     MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Subject: Re: [xacml] 7.7 Obligations


    I agree with Michiharu
    Simon
    
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Michiharu Kudoh" <KUDO@jp.ibm.com>
    To: "'XACML TC '" <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 4:24 AM
    Subject: RE: [xacml] 7.7 Obligations
    
    
    > Based on the discussion on the list,
    > - Bill and I are in agreement.
    > - Daniel seems to be uncomfortable with an authorization decision like
    DENY
    > with obligation(s).
    > - Polar seems suggesting to include understandable obligations in the
    > request context to avoid emitting no-understandable obligations to PEP
    from
    > PDP.
    >
    > My opinion is that DENY with obligation (e.g. deny provided access must be
    > logged) is still useful for some applications e.g. security policy for a
    > firewall server and an authentication server. For example, "DENY with
    > notify-admin" means that the access is rejected but the notification of
    the
    > access must be sent to admin. The TC approved to include this long time
    > ago.
    >
    > For the no-understandable obligations, the Polar's suggestion to include
    > understandable obligations in request context might be one option. It
    > definitely eliminates the case when the PEP receives non-understandable
    > obligation from the PDP. But I have a slight concern. What if there are
    > hundreds of obligations the PEP understands? Then I don't think it is an
    > efficient way to mandate to include all the understandable obligations in
    > each access request because it may make access request very large, even if
    > such information is irrelevant to many access requests. Another way would
    > be to create a communication protocol between PDP and PEP to exchange a
    > list of understandable obligations, but it seems outside the scope of
    > XACML. XACML should focus on what decision must be generated in response
    to
    > what decision request. Therefore,  I would prefer my original definition
    > that includes the case when the PEP does not understand the obligation.
    >
    > Michiharu Kudo
    >
    > IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory, Internet Technology
    > Tel. +81 (46) 215-4642   Fax +81 (46) 273-7428
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------
    > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
    > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
    >
    >
    >
    
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Powered by eList eXpress LLC