OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

 View Only

RE: [xacml] Questions on "Introducing attribute categories"

  • 1.  RE: [xacml] Questions on "Introducing attribute categories"

    Posted 03-16-2006 18:49
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: RE: [xacml] Questions on "Introducing attribute categories"


    1. Yes, this is for multiple resources profile.
    2. I thought that the main use case is for a resource being a general
    XML document - we also refer to this in hierarchical resources profile.
    It seems to me that this is a use case that is quite distinct.  
    
    As far as specifying it as an attribute value - interesting - but for
    the rest of attributes we usually do have an atomic data type defined,
    while this is complex content.  How would you refer to its data type in
    the designator?  
    
    P.S. My personal preference is for this to be defined as a completely
    separate piece:  you have a request document specifying attributes to be
    retrieved by an attribute designator, and you provide an arbitrary XML
    document separately that is the base for attribute selector.   That gets
    rid of "any" content, also makes strong typing for this XML context
    evidence easier to define. 
    
    I do not have a strong opinion on this issue though - let's keep it open
    until we are ready to edit the hierarchical resources profile.
    
    Daniel;
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Anne Anderson [mailto:Anne.Anderson@sun.com] 
    Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:44 AM
    To: OASIS XACML TC
    Subject: [xacml] Questions on "Introducing attribute categories"
    
    RE: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/200603/msg00002.html
    
    Two comments, plus one stated by Erik:
    
    1. Section 2.2 says [Current specification ... defines] "Resource
        category  Multiple resource groups may be specified in request"
    
        Is this referring to the "Multiple resources profile"?  Otherwise
        the current specification allows for only one group of attributes
        for one resource.
    
    2. Section 4.1 says [In this proposal, in the Request schema]
        "<Resource> and <ResourceContent> elements are preserved, so that
        path expressions used to identify parts of the resource content
        in XACML 2.0 need not be changed."
    
        I don't see why these are kept when <Subject>, <Action>, etc. are
        changed, and path expressions used to identify parts of XML
        element-valued Attributes in those other sections will have to
        change.
    
        While we are at it, is there a good reason why "ResourceContent"
        can't be an XML element-valued Attribute just as Subject, Action,
        and Environment Attribute values that are XML elements are?
    
    3. This comment comes from Erik: For the delegate category, we need
        a way to distinguish a category not being present from a particular
        Attribute not being present.  Lack of a delegate category is how
        an access policy is distinguished from an administrative policy.
    -- 
    Anne H. Anderson             Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM
    Sun Microsystems Laboratories
    1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311     Tel: 781/442-0928
    Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA  Fax: 781/442-1692
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
    OASIS
    at:
    https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
    information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
    entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
    legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
    or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
    and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
    by email and then delete it.
    


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