OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

 View Only

RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport

  • 1.  RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport

    Posted 10-15-2003 16:02
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport


    I think all it would take to define a generic "PolicyStatement"
    is something the following:
    
      <xs:complexType name="PolicyStatementType">
         <xs:complexContent>
           <xs:extension base="saml:StatementAbstractType">
             <xs:sequence>
               <xs:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax"
    minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
             </xs:sequence>
             <xs:attribute name="PolicyType" type="xs:anyURI"
    use="required"/>
           </xs:extension>
         </xs:complexContent>
      </xs:complexType>
    
    Then add
    
      <element ref="saml:PolicyStatement"/>
    
    to the list of choices for an "AssertionType", and define
    
      <element name="PolicyStatement" type="PolicyStatementStype">
    
    This give SAML a generic "Policy Statement" syntax.
    
    For XACML use, we then define two "PolicyType" URI's:
    
     urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:policy - content is an XACML Policy
     urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:policyset - content is an XACML PolicySet
    
    Other policy languages could define other PolicyType URIs.
    
    We would define <PolicyIdQuery> and <PolicyTargetQuery> similarly.
    
    Would this be more generally useful?  I like the idea of a
    standard "Policy Statement" and "Policy Query" included in SAML.
    
    Anne
         
    On 15 October, Hal Lockhart writes: RE: [xacml] FW:  SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport
     > From: "Hal Lockhart" <hlockhar@bea.com>
     > To: <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org>
     > Subject: RE: [xacml] FW:  SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport
     > Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:39:07 -0400
     > 
     > On the SAML call yesterday (10/14) the few people who expressed an opinion
     > felt that this was more appropriate to do in XACML. They felt that if we
     > wanted to introduce an abstract "policy" element which could contain any
     > kind of policy, not just XACML and then define the XACML constructs below
     > that, it might make sense to have SAML define abstract policy layer.
     > Otherwise the feeling was this was more appropriate to do in XACML.
     > 
     > Unless somebody feels the abstract policy layer is important, I suggest we
     > simply do it as described below. If at a future time there is a push for an
     > abstract layer, we can adjust accordingly. DOing it in the XACML TC will
     > also make it easier to deal with any interactions with other proposed 2.0
     > changes, such as to Target.
     > 
     > My feeling is that this will have to be a separate profile. Any opinions on
     > this?
     > 
     > Hal
     > 
     > > -----Original Message-----
     > > From: Hal Lockhart [mailto:hlockhar@bea.com]
     > > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:27 AM
     > > To: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
     > > Subject: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport
     > >
     > >
     > > I just posted this to the SSTC list. Comments from the XACML TC are more
     > > than welcome. Since the XACML TC F2F is before the SAML F2F, I will try to
     > > get a reading on today's call as to whether they will pursue this
     > > work item.
     > >
     > > Hal
     > >
     > > -----Original Message-----
     > > From: Hal Lockhart [mailto:hlockhar@bea.com]
     > > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:18 AM
     > > To: security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
     > > Subject: AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport
     > >
     > >
     > > I thought at least some of this had been previously proposed within the
     > > XACML TC, but I can find no evidence for this. Therefore, this should be
     > > considered as coming from me as an individual. I will cross post it to the
     > > XACML list for comment.
     > >
     > > The basic idea of this proposal is twofold:
     > >
     > > 1) wrap an XACML <Policy> or <PolicySet> in a SAML statement so as to
     > > provide a common framework for header elements (version, issuer, validity
     > > interval, signature, etc.)
     > >
     > > 2) provide a SAML mechanism to retrieve policies by identifier or by
     > > <Target> evaluation.
     > >
     > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
     > > ----------
     > > ----------------
     > > The issue that needs to be decided first is whether this work
     > > should be done
     > > within the SSTC or the XACML TC. I do not see any strong argument either
     > > way. Since the work consists of extensions to the SAML schemas,
     > > it seems to
     > > me that the SSTC should have the right of "first refusal."
     > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
     > > ----------
     > > ----------------
     > >
     > > Details:
     > >
     > > A. XACML Policy Statement
     > >
     > > Define a new SAML Statement Type:
     > >
     > > <XACMLPolicyStatement> which inherits from StatementAbstractType (not from
     > > <SubjectStatementAbstractType>)
     > >
     > > It can contain either an XACML <PolicySet> or <Policy>
     > >
     > > B. XACML Policy Query
     > >
     > > Define two new SAML Query Types:
     > >
     > > <XACMLPolicyIdQuery>
     > >
     > > <XACMLPolicyTargetQuery>
     > >
     > > All inherit from <QueryAbstractType>
     > >
     > > The <XACMLPolicyIdQuery> contains one or more <PolicyId> or <PolicySetId>
     > > values. The response would return the matching Policies or PolicySets, if
     > > available.
     > >
     > > The <XACMLPolicyTargetQuery> contains an XACML request context which needs
     > > to only include the Subject, Resource and Action elements to be considered
     > > for policy Target matching. The response would return zero or
     > > more Policies
     > > or PolicySets which are potentially applicable to the decision. The
     > > responder could chose to match on some target elements and ignore others,
     > > but it would be required to return every potentially applicable policy or
     > > policyset it has. In other words, it can return a superset, but
     > > not a subset
     > > of the policies applicable to the decision.
     > >
     > > The existing SAML <Response> would be used to return an assertion
     > > containing
     > > XACML Policies and/or PolicySets as specified by the query.
     > >
     > > Note that the existing SAML <AssertionIdReference> could also be used to
     > > request an Assertion containing XACML POlicies, but this seems less likely
     > > to be useful than the Policy Id query.
     > >
     > > Hal
     > >
     > >
     > >
     > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
     > > roster of the OASIS TC), go to
     > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/members/leave_w
     > orkgroup.php.
     > 
     > 
     > 
     > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/members/leave_workgroup.php.
    
    -- 
    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
    
    


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