MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
xacml message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] Comments resolved at 12/09/02 meeting
I did not follow the yesterday's discussion on 0052b. By looking at the
resolution below, I have to admit that I have a little different view. In
my opinion, DataType argument specified in a request context should not be
used by PDP. Data should be cast using DataType information specified in
the AttributeSelector element. In other words,
A. DataType argument specified in a request context is no longer used.
Instead, policy writer is encouraged to filter target nodes by adding a
predicate expression on DataType information of the request context. No
further filtering based on the DataType specified in the request context is
not performed by PDP (or XACML context handler).
B. AttributeSelector tries to cast the retrieved bag of values into the
DataType specified in the policy if that DataType is one of XACML primitive
data types (string etc.). If that DataType is NOT XACML primitive data
types (e.g. ds:keyinfo), then AttributeSelector does not cast the retrieved
bag of values but just returns the bag of DOM nodes.
The rationale is the following:
A. We cannot resolve DataType argument in the request context at every case
(as described in the Anne's message). Some case we can retrieve it (.e.g
case 1a) but not in other cases (e.g. case 3b, 4). In particular, it is not
possible to get schema type information from a specific node information
because no API for doing that has been defined. Then 1b, 2b, 3b is not
implementable. Moreover, it seems difficult to reason DataType by just
looking inside the XPath expression (case 1a, 2a, 3a). So my suggestion is
to give up to utilize DataType argument specified in the request context to
know the data type of the retrieved nodes.
B. Since AttributeSelector element has a DataType attribute, it is possible
to cast the retrieved nodes into the data of the specified DataType. This
enables flexible data handling: if the DataType is XACML primitive data,
then the cast operation is performed. If not XACML primitive data, the
retrieved data is handled as a DOM data type and handed to XACML external
function that deals with the DOM nodes.
The following is examples:
===============
Example 1)
<Request>
<Subject>
<Attribute AttributeId="serial-no" DataType="..string" IssueInstant
="12/10">
<AttributeValue>1234</AttributeValue>
</Attribute>
<Attribute AttributeId="keyinfo" DataType="..ds:keyinfo" IssueInstant
="12/10">
<AttributeValue>
<ds:KeyInfo>
<ds:KeyName>Alice</ds:KeyName>
<ds:KeyValue>
<ds:RSAKeyValue> ... </ds:RSAKeyValue>
</ds:KeyName>
</ds:KeyInfo>
</AttributeValue>
</Attribute>
</Subject>
</Request>
================
Case 1)
<AttributeSelector
RequestContextPath="//Attribute[@AttributeId='serial-no' and
@DataType='..string']/AttributeValue/text()" DataType="..string"/>
The above AttributeSelector retrieves a text node "1234" in the request.
This value is cast into XACML string type specified in the
AttributeSelector element.
================
Case 2)
<AttributeSelector
RequestContextPath="//Attribute[@AttributeId='serial-no' and
@DataType='..string']/AttributeValue/text()" DataType="..integer"/>
The above AttributeSelector is still valid. The value "1234" is cast into
an integer type and it succeeds. The caller of the AttributeSelector
receives a bag of one integer.
================
Case 3)
<AttributeSelector
RequestContextPath="//Attribute/@IssueInstant" DataType="..DateTime"/>
The above AttributeSelector retrieves "12/10" and the caller of the
AttributeSelector receives a bag of one DateTime.
================
Case 4)
<AttributeSelector
RequestContextPath="//Attribute[@AttributeId='keyinfo' and
@DataType='..ds:keyinfo']/AttributeValue" DataType="..ds:KeyInfo"/>
The above AttributeSelector retrieves ds:KeyInfo node as a aggregated DOM
node. Since data type specified in the policy is not XACML primitive data
type, then no cast operation is performed and a DOM structure (it should be
a XACML primitive type) is returned (as one element bag structure). The
policy writer is expected to specify an external function that handles such
DOM node. The returned bag may include more than one DOM node.
Michiharu Kudo
IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory, Internet Technology
Tel. +81 (46) 215-4642 Fax +81 (46) 273-7428
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Anne Anderson |
| | <Anne.Anderson@Su|
| | n.com> |
| | |
| | 2002/12/10 05:37 |
| | Please respond to|
| | Anne.Anderson |
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Seth Proctor <Seth.Proctor@Sun.com>, "John Merrells <merrells@jiffysoftware.com> XACML |
| COMMENT", XACML TC <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org> |
| cc: |
| Subject: [xacml] Comments resolved at 12/09/02 meeting |
| |
| |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
The appended comment text represents the resolutions to comments
that were made at the 12/09/02 XACML Comment Subcommittee
meeting.
Present: Anne Anderson, Tim Moses, Carlisle Adams, Bill Parducci,
Michiharu Kudo, Polar Humenn, Hal Lockhart.
The XACML Comments Subcommittee will meet again on Tuesday
12/10/02 from 10am - noon (EST) to resolve the remaining open
comments, which are:
0071.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00035.html
Subject: Element <Description>
[editorial]
0072.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00039.html
Subject: 5.31 Element <AttributeSelector>
[several sub-comments, possibly resolved by #68]
0073.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00047.html
Subject: XACML 1.0 Committee Specification Comments
[lots of sub-comments]
Anne
--
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
Comments resolved on 12/09/02 or still open after 12/09/02
====================================================================
0052b. "In the case where the XPath expression matches attributes in
the request context by AttributeId, it must also match the
attribute's data-type with the selector's DataType."
Does the 'it' above mean the XPath expression? So, it's saying
that if you write an xpath expression to select an attribute from
the context, and the expression includes a predicate for matching
with an AttributeID, then that expression MUST also include a
predicate that matches the selectors data type with the data type
of the selected attribute...?
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Resolved 12/09/02.
RESPONSE: "it" means the XACML context handler. The XACML
context handler must filter the values returned by the XPath
expression based on matching the DataType, returning only those
that match the DataType to the PDP.
ACTIONS:
Use the wording in the XACML draft dated 12/6/02 (attached to
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-editors/200212/msg00024.html)
plus the following edits:
1) Section 5.32: eliminate references to "primitive" type.
2) In Section 5.32, pdf:2373-2375: replace following sentence:
In the case that the XPath expression matches attributes in
the request context by their Attribute Id, the PDP MUST
additionally verify that the attribute's DataType is the
same as the element's DataType.
with
The PDP SHALL eliminate values from the resulting bag that
are not of the DataType specified in the AttributeSelector.
3) In Section 6.7 Element <Attribute>, pdf:2633, change the description of
the DataType xml attribute from:
Attribute data type
to:
The data type of the contents of the <AttributeValue>
element. This SHALL be either a primitive type defined by
the XACML 1.0 Specification or a type defined in a schema
whose namespace is defined in the Context schema.
4) In Section 5.32 Element <AttributeSelector>, pdf:2403: change
the description of the DataType xml attribute from:
The data-type of the attribute.
to
The data-type of the value of each node in the sequence
returned by the XPath expression.
DISCUSSION:
12/9/02: There are several cases (I may not have the XPath syntax
quite right -aha)
1. An XPath expression may select nodes that are parents of the
contents of an <AttributeValue>. The selected nodes may
contain
1a. A primitive value.
Example: "/Request/Subject/Attribute@IssueInstant"
selects primitive values of type xs:dataTime from the
IssueInstant xml attribute of all Subject Attributes.
1b. A structured value.
Example: "/Request/Subject/Attribute" selects
structured values whose structure is defined in
the XACML schema. Type is xacml:AttributeType
In this case, the XACML schema itself specifies the type of
the resulting node value(s).
2. An XPath expression may select the full contents of one or more
<AttributeValue> nodes themselves. The selected nodes may contain
1a. A primitive value.
Example:
"/Request/Subject/Attribute[@AttributeId="urn:...:subject-id"
and @DataType="xacml:x500Name"]"
might select one or more primitive values like "cn=Anne,
ou=Labs, o=Sun, c=US", with a DataType of xacml:x500Name.
1b. A structured value.
Example:
"/Request/Subject/Attribute[@AttributeId="urn:...:key-info
and @DataType=ds:keyInfo"
would select structured elements with values like:
<ds:KeyName>anne's public key</ds:KeyName>
<ds:KeyValue>
<ds:RSAKeyValue>
<ds:Modulus>BQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAK/yHi+g4n</ds:Modulus>
<ds:Exponent>CZGRYY2feUmVrM0QKOzAdr</ds:Exponent>
</ds:RSAKeyValue>
</ds:KeyValue>
In this case, the <Attribute> element's DataType xml attribute
specifies the type of the resulting node value(s).
3. An XPath expression may select nodes that are sub-elements of the
contents of an <AttributeValue>. The selected nodes may contain
3a. A primitive value.
Example:"/Request/Subject/Attribute[@AttributeId="urn:...:key-info
and @DataType=ds:keyInfo/KeyName"
would select elements of xs:string DataType with values like:
"anne's public key"
3b. A structured value.
Example:"/Request/Subject/Attribute[@AttributeId="urn:...:key-info
and @DataType=ds:keyInfo/KeyValue"
would select elements with values like:
<ds:RSAKeyValue>
<ds:Modulus>BQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAK/yHi+g4n</ds:Modulus>
<ds:Exponent>CZGRYY2feUmVrM0QKOzAdr</ds:Exponent>
</ds:RSAKeyValue>
In this case, the schema associated with the "ds" namespace
(which must be referenced in an xmlns attribute in the Context
header) will specify the type of the resulting node value(s).
4. An XPath expression may select the ResourceContent or a
sub-element of the ResourceContent.
In this case the schema associated with the ResourceContent
will specify the type of the resulting node value(s).
Where the values selected are of primitive types defined by
XACML, then standard XACML functions can deal with them.
Where the values selected are of primitive or structured types
not defined by XACML, then extended functions must be supplied to
deal with them.
=======================================================================
0066.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00016.html
Subject: another resource question
From: Seth Proctor <seth.proctor@sun.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:08:04 -0500
Section 7.8 doesn't say anything about error conditions, and I'm
wondering if it should. I know that some things are out of scope
and shouldn't be considered (eg, if only some Descendants could
be resolved, the app-specific code should decide whether or not
this is an error). But what should happen if there is some
unrecoverable error in the process of discovering the resource
list? Should the PDP return an error, or should it evaluate with
the single resource that was provided in the Request? I would
hope it could return an error, but 7.8 doesn't say anything about
this.
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Resolved 12/09/02.
RESPONSE: Allow for <Decision>s to be returned about resources
that could not be discovered. Do this by returning a <Decision>
with the ResourceId of the hierarchical element that could not be
resolved or completely resolved, with an error <Status> on that
<Decision>. Other <Decision>s on hierarchical elements, even if
they are descendants of the element that has the error, may have
non-error <Status> in the same Response.
ACTIONS:
Use wording from 12/6/02 draft (attached to
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-editors/200212/msg00024.html)
with the following additional edit:
pdf:2918:
1) eliminate "related"
2) insert between element and SHALL the words "associated with
the parent element".
=======================================================================
0068.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200211/msg00134.html
Subject: D002
From: John Merrells <merrells@jiffysoftware.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 17:35:05 -0800
[Same comment submitted for D024]
The policy uses string-equal as if the args were (bag<string>,string),
this should
probably be using the any-of method...
<Condition
FunctionId="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:function:string-equal">
<SubjectAttributeDesignator
AttributeId="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:conformance-tests:bogus"
DataType="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/>
<AttributeValue
DataType="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string";;>Zaphod
Beeblebrox</AttributeValue>
CATEGORY: Incorrect.
SEE ALSO: #69
STATUS: Resolved 12/09/02.
RESPONSE: Use wording specified in ACTIONS below. Say nothing in
the specification about policies that are rejected before ever
being presented to a PDP for evaluation: XACML specifies only the
behavior of the PDP in evaluating a policy that is presented to
it. Conformance Tests will not require systems that reject
policies asynchronously with Request evaluations to return a
given Response that depends on the rejected policy.
ACTIONS:
1) Add to Section 7 a new sub-section:
7.x Syntax and Type Errors
If a policy with invalid syntax is evaluated by the XACML PDP
at the time a Request is received, then the result of that
policy SHALL be "Indeterminate" with a StatusCode value of
"urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:status:syntax-error".
If a policy with invalid static types is evaluated by the XACML
PDP at the time a Request is received, then the result of that
policy SHALL be "Indeterminate" with a StatusCode value of
"urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:status:processing-error".
2) Add following "Special Instructions" to every Conformance Test
that uses an initial policy that has a syntax or static type
error:
The policy for this test contains [schema|static type] errors.
If an initial policy with invalid [syntax|static types] MAY
EVER be evaluated by the implementation's XACML PDP at the time
a Request is received, then this test MUST be passed. In this
case, the resulting Decision MUST be "Indeterminate"
with a StatusCode value of
["urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:status:syntax-error" - if
syntax error
|
"urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:status:processing-error" - if
static type error
]
If the implementation's XACML PDP CAN NEVER attempt to evaluate
an initial policy with invalid [syntax|static types], then the
implementation MUST demonstrate that the policy in *Policy.xml
will be rejected by whatever entity is responsible for
validating policy syntax in the system in which the XACML PDP
will be used. In this case, the supplied Request and Response
files are not relevant and may be ignored.
DISCUSSION:
Summary: some implementations perform validity checking on
policies at the time they are configured into the PDP. The PDP
will never see such policies. These PDPs may, however, see
invalid policies that are referenced via a PolicyIdReference or
PolicySetIdReference.
Other implementations may look for and evaluate policies only at
the time a Request is received. In this case, one or more of the
initial policies may have validity errors.
The XACML specification should not force an implementation to
perform policy validity checking (syntax or type) at the time a
Request is received, so the Conformance tests should not require
this.
==========================================================================
0069. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/200212/msg00027.html
Subject: IIC012: syntax-error or processing-error?
From: Anne Anderson <Anne.Anderson@Sun.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 08:58:43 -0500 (EST)
Conformance Test IIC012 is intended to test for the error case in
which a Condition FunctionId uses a function that does not return
a Boolean result. The <Condition is:
<Condition FunctionId
="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:function:integer-subtract">
<Apply FunctionId
="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:function:integer-one-and-only">
<SubjectAttributeDesignator
AttributeId
="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:conformance-test:age"
DataType="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"/>
</Apply>
<Apply FunctionId
="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:function:integer-one-and-only">
<EnvironmentAttributeDesignator
AttributeId
="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:conformance-test:bart-simpson-age"
DataType="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"/>
</Apply>
</Condition>
Question: should the StatusCode Value from evaluating this Policy
be "urn:...:status:syntax-error" (since it is a type error), or
"urn:...:status:processing-error"?
I'm leaning toward syntax-error. What do others think?
CATEGORY: Unclear.
SEE ALSO: #68
STATUS: Resolved 12/09/92 (same as #68).
RESPONSE: See #68
ACTIONS: See #68
DISCUSSION:
Long discussion on xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
See #68.
==========================================================================
0071.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00035.html
Subject: Element <Description>
From: Anne Anderson <Anne.Anderson@Sun.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 14:02:39 -0500 (EST)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0071a. In Section 5.20 "Element <Policy>" under the description of the
<Description> sub-element, add "See 5.2 Element
<Description>."
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0071b. In Section 5.2 "Element <Description>", change first sentence
from:
The <Description> element is used for a free-form
description of the <PolicySet> element and <Policy>
element.
to:
The <Description> element is used for a free-form
description of the <PolicySet>, <Policy>, and <Rule>
elements.
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
===========================================================================
0072.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00039.html
Subject: 5.31 Element <AttributeSelector>
From: John Merrells <merrells@jiffysoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:16:38 -0800
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0072a. If you want to enforce type correctness
between the selector and the values then you have these
choices... 1) The author of the XPath expression must write the
expression so that it matches both the AttributeId and the
DataType.
Subject/Attribute[AttributeId= '...subject-id' and
DataType"..."]/AttributeValue
or, 2) the processor must enforce the type correctness. Option 1
is clearly error prone as people just won't bother, option 2
could be quite hard. [Although using the AttributeValue as the
context node you could say "../@DataType"]
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
[Anne Anderson]
I think we specified option 2 in the resolution to 0052b:
The XACML context handler must filter the values returned by the
XPath expression based on matching the DataType, returning only
those that match the DataType to the PDP.
[John Merrells, responding to Michiharu Kudo]
>For the type correctness, I don't expect that option 1 always
>occurs. So each implementation should enforce the type
>correctness. I mean that the processor just calls some XPath
>processor to retrieve the requested node set irrespective of the
>datatype specified in the selector. After some string
>conversions are performed, the processor checks whether each
>string value can be converted to the datatype specified in the
>selector. Either way, this kind of run-time type checking should
>be implemented for the case of ResourceContent.
Good. The specification text needs to be changed. Currently it
states:
"In the case where the XPath expression matches attributes in the
request context by AttributeId, it must also match the
attribute's data-type with the selector's DataType. "
>If XPath expression does not include a predicate expression to
>satisfy data type requirement (Subject/Attribute[AttributeId=
>'...subject-id' and DataType"..."]/AttributeValue), it can
>select a node that has different data type. But I think this is
>the problem of the policy specification and not the problem of
>the AttributeSelector specification. Certainly, it would be
>better to add some note about this in the specification.
Yes. If the expression author writes an XPath that selects
multiple attribute values with different DataTypes, then that is
their problem.
It would be good for the specification to point this out for
expression writers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0072b. How is the selected node converted into a value?
You can convert a node into a string-value, as defined in the
XPath spec. You then have a choice of using the string to value
conversions that are defined in XPath, or use the conversions as
defined in XACML. I would specify as the later, as XPath has some
oddities in this area. (ie. The string 'false' has the boolen
value true.)
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
[Anne Anderson]
I believe this is clearly specified in Section 5.33,
pdf:2404-2415:
XPath 1.0: apply "string" function
XPath 2.0: use xf:string accessor function.
[John Merrells, responding to Michiharu Kudo]
>I think that the semantics of the AttributeSelector should
>conform to the specified version of the XPath. So the conversion
>functions would be ones specified in the corresponding XPath
>specification. In the case of XPath 1.0, each conversion (node
>set to string value and string value to each data type) would be
>the conversion specified in XPath 1.0 even if it may have some
>oddities in it.
I'd suggest that Implementors of XACML will find it easier to
convert a string into an XACML type, than to convert a string
into an XPath type and then into an XACML type. Fisrtly the XPath
conversion functions would have to be exposed through the XPath
processor API. The XPath interface specification does not mandate
this. Also, the string to XACML type constructors should be
readily available. [As the implementor will almost certainly have
implemented these for expression processing.] Secondly, the
specification will have to provide a table that maps the XPath
type system onto the XACML type system.
[Michiharu Kudo, responding to John Merrells]
For the string type, I think there is no need to specify which
string type to be implemented in the specification. It is up to
the implementors. In turn, that string must be converted into
the target XACML data type (e.g. XMLSchema#boolean) specified in
the AttributeSelector element. This conversion is not clearly
specified in the specification. We may borrow conversion
semantics from XPath 2.0 function and operator draft document
e.g. xf:boolean-from-string.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0072c. The next problem is working out which type to convert the
string-value into.
If we assume that the author or processor has checked that the
selector and value types match then we can use the DataType
specified in the selector.
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
[Anne Anderson]
I believe this is specified in the response to #52b: The XACML
context handler must filter the values returned by the XPath
expression based on matching the DataType, returning only those
that match the DataType to the PDP.
[John Merrells, responding to Michiharu Kudo]
>And I could not find any XACML function definition that converts
>"false" string value to False boolean value in the committee
>specification. Which function are you talking about?
Section '4.3 Boolean Functions': "Function: boolean
boolean(object) ... a string is true if and only if its length is
non-zero"
>If the conversion failed, then "Indeterminate" should be
>returned (optionally with some status code such as
>syntax-error).
This statement should be added to the specification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0072d. Another example that should be explored is an XPath
expression executed over the ResourceContent.
In this case there are no DataTypes provided with the values, so
there's no type checking that can be performed. We can only
assume that the value provided is a valid representation for a an
instance of the value of DataType specified in the selector. If
the value can not be coerced into that DataType then what should
the processor return?
CATEGORY: Incomplete.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
[Michiharu Kudo]
In the case of ResourceContent, the selected node set and resultant string
value(s) must be checked against the data type specified in the selector.
If the conversion failed, then "Indeterminate" should be returned
(optionally with some status code such as syntax-error).
===========================================================================
0073.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml-comment/200212/msg00047.html
Subject: XACML 1.0 Committee Specification Comments
From: "Chopra, Dipak" <dipak.chopra@sap.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 05:44:55 +0100
I reviewed the XACML 1.0 Committee Spec and here is the list of
questions/comments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073a. Can PAP and PDP exchange Policy Set?
Based on the Section 3.1 Data Flow Model, it seems like only
Policy can be exchanged. If that is the case, how can PDP
evaluate Policy Set as mentioned in Section 7.7 Policy Set
Evaluation?
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073b. What is the commonality between different Policy elements
in the same Policy Set?
The requirement on line #354 seems to indicate that the merging
of different Policy elements into Policy Set is governed by "a
given action". Does it mean that the cardinality between Policy
Set and Action is 1 to 1? It seems confusing as schema does not
suggest that.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073c. As Target can have multiple Resource and Action elements,
not every Action is valid for each Resource. But the current
schema allows to provide more non-existent access to resources.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073d. What is the significance of an Obligation with
FulfillOn="Deny"?
Which use case needs this feature?
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073e. Line #2675, scope can be "Descendants" or "Children" as
mentioned on lines #2907, 2908 in the case of multiple results.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073f. Section 7.6 Policy Evaluation.
The table should be Policy truth table.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073g. Section 7.7 Policy Set Evaluation.
The table should be Policy Set truth table.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073h. In this table, what is the meaning of "Effect" of Policy.
As far as schema is concerned, Policy does not have this
attribute. Only Rule has Effect element. Probably the right
statement "At least one policy value has the calculated effect
value".
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073i. Line #2907, 2908.
It seems like authorization decision MAY include multiple results
based on the structure of resource sub-tree. I think this
mechanism provides more information than requested. PEP is
requesting if this subject(s) has the specified access
(actions(s)) on the specified resource and its child nodes. The
response should be one result. Why would PEP want to get detailed
result information for each sub-node under resource? PEP must
know about the structure (if there is any) of the requested
resource and accordingly request for authorization decision from
PDP. Based on that response, PEP should be able to allow or
disallow the request. On line #2968, it says only one Decision
element, which is not right based on lines #2907, 2908.
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0073j. There are two different types of resources.
Functionality resource and data-instance resource. For example,
ManagePO resource can be used to create/delete/modify an instance
of PO. So ManagePO is a type of functionality type resource and
instance of PO is a data-instance type resource. If we need to
mandate that this action of this data-instance type resource can
only be permitted by this functionality-type resource, how do we
enforce that?
CATEGORY: Unclear.
STATUS: Not yet discussed.
RESPONSE:
ACTIONS:
DISCUSSION:
=====================================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------
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