OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

 View Only

#31: Passing arbitrary sets of Attributes in the request (Re: [xacml]Minutes of 27 April 2006 XACML TC Meeting)

  • 1.  #31: Passing arbitrary sets of Attributes in the request (Re: [xacml]Minutes of 27 April 2006 XACML TC Meeting)

    Posted 04-27-2006 17:16
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: #31: Passing arbitrary sets of Attributes in the request (Re: [xacml]Minutes of 27 April 2006 XACML TC Meeting)


    #31: Passing arbitrary sets of Attributes in the request
             (for use with subsequent potential delegates).  Erik
             thinks it would just make the request and its evaluation
             more complex; would need a way to refer to these
             "potential attributes".  Are the Attributes "invisible"
             until the associated delegate appears in the reduction?
             Erik proposes passing such Attributes would be outside
             the core specification.  Implementation-specific Context
             Handler is responsible for making these available when
             appropriate.  Erik thinks these should be added to the
             SAML Profile.  Alternative would be putting them in the
             XACML Request.  Profile would provide way to pass
             Attributes in XACML Attribute format, so they don't have
             to be converted back to SAML Attributes.  Profile will
             also need an ID element structure so Context Handler can
             tell which identity various Attributes are associated
             with.
    
    
    Could Erik maybe elaborate on the issues raised?
    
    I do not understand arguments that passing the attribute sets in the
    request context makes the evaluation more complex.
    What is the alternative? Wouldn't you always end-up with the equivalent
    processing no matter how you pass them?
    
    If you do not pass them in a "functional" argument, then you have to
    rely on global state to pass those attribute sets, which is most of the
    time undesirable.
    
    We have the equivalent working in our Globus Toolkit authorization
    Java-code for some time now...
    
    Regards, Frank.
    
    -- 
    Frank Siebenlist               franks@mcs.anl.gov
    The Globus Alliance - Argonne National Laboratory
    
    


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