OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

Re: [xacml] DRAFT minutes from F2F

  • 1.  Re: [xacml] DRAFT minutes from F2F

    Posted 10-24-2003 17:28
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: Re: [xacml] DRAFT minutes from F2F


    Bill, you did a great job.  You even managed to contribute while
    taking minutes!
    
    Anne
    
    Comments below:
    
    On 24 October, bill parducci writes: [xacml] DRAFT minutes from F2F
     > F2F Meeting – Oct. 20, 2003 – BEA, San Jose
     > 
     > Attendance:
     > Frank Siebenlist
     > Anne Anderson
     > Tim Moses
     > Polar Humenn
     > Daniel Engovatov   (observer)
     > Bill Parducci
     > Michiharu Kudo
     > Michael McIntosh   (prospective member)
     > Anthony Nadalin
     > MaryAnn Hondo      (observer)
     > Jacques Durand     (prospective member)
     > Hal Lockhart
     > 
     > Reviewed Work Items:
     > (minutes refer to discussion topics by Work Item number)
     > 
     > 2. Seth now Champion for the modified version of this WI. A new item 
    
    Clarification:
    
    This work item was not actually changed.  There was some
    clarification: it refers to information needed to configure a
    PDP, included either in a Request, in a Policy, or possibly in a
    3rd document type.
    
     > (#41) has been created to cover generalizing classification of entities 
     > and declaration (third schema to represent?)  Daniel will address this 
    
    Clarify:
    
    Daniel will address #41, not #2.
    
     > by Nov. 3.
     > 
     > 7. Proposes that condition references to be used to allow for reuse of 
     > conditions. Limited to conditions within the same policy. Proposal is 
    
    Provide the rationale:
    "reuse of conditions in Rules that may have different Targets."
    
     > fairly complete and is ready for review and decision.
     > 
     > 8. Proposes that rule references to be used to allow for reuse of rules. 
     > May span across policies. This implies that the rule becomes the lowest 
     > administrative unit. This is dependent upon the decision of #19. 
     > Decision of the group is that #19 is not valid since the use case may be 
     > resolved having policies containing single rules.
    
    Clarify:
    Not so much that #19 is "not valid" as that it is "not needed".
    I think this item is now closed.
    #8 is also not needed, for same reason, and is now closed.
     > 
     > 9. Proposes extended syntax to address hierarchical Subject, Actions and 
     > Resources.  Concern is that it is Resource specific and that it may be 
     > able difficult to address the intricacies of any given Resource domain. 
     > It was decided that hierarchical polices and hierarchical requests (new 
     > WI, #42) be split apart for discussion and consideration.
     > 
     > 10. Proposes extended syntax for Combining Algorithms to allow for the 
     > influence of rule combination evaluation by parameters of the rules 
     > themselves. There is general agreement on the value of this approach, 
     > however it is not thought to be widely required. Therefore the feeling 
     > is that this should be handled via an extension point added to the 
     > schema. This WI is therefore closed and the topic taken up in #11.
     > 
     > 12. Proposes environment attributes for Target. VOTE: approve as 
     > proposed – 8 FOR, 1 Abstain (Daniel, pending discussion of function 
     > extensions). Closed.
     > 
     > 16. Determined that this doesn’t introduce anything new to 
     > specification. Closed.
     > 
     > 17. Determined that this doesn’t introduce anything new to 
     > specification. Closed.
     > 
     > 19. Closed in junction with discussion of #8.
     > 
     > 26. Satisfied by existing specification using Policy Combination 
     > Algorithm. Closed.
    
    Correction:
    This item is not satisfied using any sort of policy combination
    algorithm.  It is closed because there is not a strong use case
    for the XACML 2.0 time frame and it would be difficult to
    implement due to semantic complexities.
    
     > 29. Proposes delegation of policy combination with the constraint that 
    
    Clarification:
    delegation of policy evaluation and combination
    
     > authorization assertions be passed with requests from remote (trusted) 
     > systems. The scope to the problem is not fully understood by the group 
     > and the proposal was made to pursue administrative policy solutions 
     > first, then return to this issue. Also includes #38 (placing conditions 
     > on members of the delegation chain for operating on policies.)
     > 
     > 30. Proposed that policy may be passed with an access request. There is 
     > concern that this will create issues with combinations of other 
     > applicable policies. It has been suggested that there the use case may 
     > be addressed by making remote PAP accessible to local PDP. This 
     > mechanism is related to #29 & #38 and will be discussed in the context 
     > of these issues.
     > 
     > 35. Proposes that there is policy specifically developed to cover the 
     > return of missing attributes in decisions with Not Applicable results. 
     > It has been suggested that this is covered by the current specification. 
     > Documentation that details how this may be treated in XACML needs to be 
     > generated.
     >
     > 36. Proposes that PDP have formally defined access control mechanism to 
     > downstream PDPs. This is not consistent with what was generally 
     > understood by the group from the original WI. There is concern that the 
     > scope of this problem is outside of what is practically addressable in 
     > XACML. Further clarification is necessary. This will likely tie into the 
     > discussion of #29, #30 & #38.
     > 
     > 37. Proposes a shorthand model for passing multiple elements. Deferred 
     > until tomorrow (rest of group arrives).
     > 
     > 38. Covered in #30. Deferred pending outcome of #30.
     > 
     > 40. Proposes optimized Policy query in SAML. Two non-conflicting 
     > proposals are on the table. This will be discussed further on the e-mail 
     > list.
    
    Correction:
    Nothing is "optimized".  Proposed a general Policy Assertion and
    Policy Query in SAML.  Two non-conflicting proposals: one creates
    an XACMLPolicyStatement and XACMLPolicyQuery, while other one
    creates a SAML PolicyStatement and PolicyQuery, from which the
    XACML-specific forms would be derived.
    
     > +++
     > 
     > F2F Meeting – Oct. 21, 2003 – BEA, San Jose
     > 
     > Attendance:
     > Frank Siebenlist
     > Anne Anderson
     > Tim Moses
     > Polar Humenn
     > Daniel Engovatov
     > Simon Godik
     > Bill Parducci
     > Michiharu Kudo
     > Michael McIntosh
     > Rebekah Lepro
     > Hal Lockhart
     > Steve Anderson
     > 
     > Reviewed the discussions of Monday’s meeting.
     > 
     > Anne provided a historical review of derivation of single attribute 
     > value model in current spec.
     > 
     > (minutes refer to discussion topics by Work Item number)
     > 
     > 37. Based on the general belief that this proposal will not affect XPath 
     > attribute queries, the consensus is that this item be approved pending 
     > further clarification (cardinality & descriptive schema changes). Rebeka 
     > will provide a first pass at the changes for the Editor.
     > 
     > Hierarchical authorization issues:
     > 
     > 9. Resources – If you want to support request that specify the resource 
     > as a hierarchy (specifically, XML), there must be instance at request. 
     > Wildcards are allowed in hierarchical policies.
    
    Clarification:
    "policies about hierarchical entities" rather than "hierarchical policies"
     > 
     > 42. Requests – hierarchical resource requests MUST use the “scope” 
     > attribute when intentionally requesting resources with subordinate data 
     > members (vs. using /* in an XPath expression). Clarification is required 
     > to define how responses for situations where hierarchical resources 
     > without descendants are queried for descendant access.
     > 
     > Policy Administration:
     > 
     > A number of proposals were discussed, however no clear solution arose as 
     > the majority of the session involved the expression of the requirements.
     > 
     > A higher order requirement proposed by Frank is the ability to evaluate 
     > policies taking into consideration “admin” of the policy to allow for 
     > policy chain decisions.
     > 
     > +++
     > 
     > F2F Meeting – Oct. 22, 2003 – BEA, San Jose
     > 
     > Attendance:
     > Frank Siebenlist
     > Anne Anderson
     > Tim Moses
     > Polar Humenn
     > Simon Godik
     > Bill Parducci
     > Michael McIntosh
     > Rebekah Lepro
     > Hal Lockhart
     > Steve Anderson
     > Anthony Nadalin
     > MaryAnn Hondo
     > Jacques Durand
     > 
     > Reviewed the discussions of Tuesday’s meeting.
     > 
     > Anne reviewed her Administrative Policy proposal. Frank’s and Polar will 
     > post their respective AP proposals to the mailing list.
     > 
     > Anne & Tim proposed that the XACML TC continue its work on the current 
     > WSPL proposal, focusing on the authorization policy constraints of Web 
     > Services. The premise is that this work adopt/integrate the efforts of 
     > proposed policy advertising committees as (as yet undefined in Oasis & 
     > W3C). Until such time the group would provide examples of how this 
     > mechanism would work; the intent of the group is that this non-normative 
     > output would be replaced/merged with forthcoming standards in this area.
     > 
     > Scope of proposed work:
     > 
     > 1. Subset of XACML suitable for describing conditions on access control 
     > related attributes that are: (1). required for accessing a service; (2). 
     > available for a presentation service accessor. NORMATIVE.
     > 
     > 2. Combining subset instances from above to determine a mutually 
     > acceptable set of access control related attributes. NORMATIVE.
     > 
     > 3. Examples of how such instances are associated with WSDL at message, 
     > operation port type, etc. NON-NORMATIVE.
     > 
     > The group decided that this scope is acceptable and that work will 
     > continue as defined above.
     > 
     > Tim reviewed an approach for LDAP storage of policies to address 
     > many-to-many PDP/PAP relationships.  The topic was also raised as to 
     > whether remote policy requests should be considered.
     > 
     > 
     > 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]