skip to main content
article

A logical framework for reasoning about access control models

Published:01 February 2003Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The increased awareness of the importance of data protection has made access control a relevant component of current data management systems. Moreover, emerging applications and data models call for flexible and expressive access control models. This has led to an extensive research activity that has resulted in the definition of a variety of access control models that differ greatly with respect to the access control policies they support. Thus, the need arises for developing tools for reasoning about the characteristics of these models. These tools should support users in the tasks of model specification, analysis of model properties, and authorization management. For example, they must be able to identify inconsistencies in the model specification and must support the administrator in comparing the expressive power of different models. In this paper, we make a first step in this direction by proposing a formal framework for reasoning about access control models. The framework we propose is based on a logical formalism and is general enough to model discretionary, mandatory, and role-based access control models. Each instance of the proposed framework corresponds to a C-Datalog program, interpreted according to a stable model semantics. In the paper, besides giving the syntax and the formal semantics of our framework, we show some examples of its application. Additionally, we present a number of dimensions along which access control models can be analyzed and compared. For each dimension, we show decidability results and we present some examples of its application.

References

  1. Adam, N., Atluri, V., Bertino, E., and Ferrari, E. 2002. A Content-Based Authorization Model for Digital Libraries. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 14, 2 (March/April), 296--315. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AGG. See http://tfs.cs.tu-berlin.de/agg/docu.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ammann, P. and Sandhu, R. 1991. Safety Analysis for the Extended Schematic Protection Model. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. Oakland, California, 87--97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Atluri, V. and Huang, W. 2000. A Petri Net Based Safety Analysis of Workflow Authorization Models. J. Comput. Secu. 8, 2&3. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, D. and Padula, L. L. 1975. Secure Computer Systems: Unified Exposition and Multics Interpretation. Tech. Rep. ESD-TR-75-306, Hanscom Air Force Base, Bedford, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertino, E., Bettini, C., Ferrari, E., and Samarati, P. 1998. An Access Control Mechanism Supporting Periodicity Constraints and Temporal Reasoning. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 23, 3, 231--285. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertino, E., Buccafurri, F., Ferrari, E., and Rullo, P. 2000. A Logic-Based Approach for Enforcing Access Control. J. Comput. Secu. 8, 2&3. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertino, E., Catania, B., Ferrari, E., and Perlasca, P. 2002. A System to Specify and Manage Multipolicy Access Control Models. In Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bertino, E., Ferrari, E., and Atluri, V. 1999. The Specification and Enforcement of Authorization Constraints in Workflow Managenent Systems. ACM Trans. Inform. Syst. Secu. 2, 1, 65--104. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Bertino, E., Samarati, P., and Jajodia, S. 1997. An Extended Authorization Model. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Engi. 9, 1 (January/February). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Castano, S., Fugini, M., Martella, G., and Samarati, P. 1995. Database Security. Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. CORAL. \newblock See ftp.cs.wisc.edu/coral/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. ECLiPSe. \newblock See http://www-icparc.doc.ic.ac.uk/eclipse/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H., Montanari, U., and Rozenberg, G., Eds. 1999. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation. vol. 2 (Applications, Languages, and Tools). World Scientific. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Fernandez, E., Gudes, E., and Song, H. 1994. A Model for Evaluation and Administration of Security in Object-Oriented Databases. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 6, 275--292. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferrari, E. and Thuraisingham, B. 2000. Secure Database Systems. In Advanced Databases: Technology and Design, O. Diaz and M. Piattini, Eds. Artech House, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Gaifman, H., Mairson, H., Sagiv, Y., and Vardi, M. 1987. Undecidable Optimization Problems in Database Logic Programs. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer. 106--115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Glauert, J., Kennaway, R., and Sleep, R. 1991. DACTL: An Experimental Graph Rewriting Language. In Proceedings of the 4th. International Workshop on Graph Grammars and their Application to Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Ed. vol. 532. 378--395. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Greco, S., Leone, N., and Rullo, P. 1992. COMPLEX: An Object-Oriented Logic Programming System. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 4, 72--87. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Haas, L., Chang, W., and Lohman, G. 1990. Starbust Mid-Flight: As the Dust Clears. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2, 33--54. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jaeger, T. and Tidswell, J. 2001. Practical Safety in Flexible Access Control Models. ACM Trans. Inform. Syst. Secu. 4, 2 (May), 158--190. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Jajodia, S., Samarati, P., Sapino, M., and Subrahmanian, V. 2001. Flexible Support for Multiple Access Control Policies. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 26, 2 (June), 214--260. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Jajodia, S., Samarati, P., Subrahmanian, V., and Bertino, E. 1997. A Unified Framework for Enforcing Multiple Access Control Policies. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. 474--485. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Koch, M., Mancini, L., and Parisi-Presicce, F. 2000. A Formal Model for Role-Based Access Control Using Graph Transformation. In Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security. 122--139. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Koch, M., Mancini, L., and Parisi-Presicce, F. 2001. On the Specification and Evolution of Access Control Policies. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies (SACMAT-01). Chantilly, Virginia, USA, 121--130. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Levy, A., Mumick, I., Sagiv, Y., and Shmueli, O. 1993. Equivalence, Query-Reachability, and Satisfiability in Datalog Extensions. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems. 109--122. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Lloyd, J. 1987. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Millen, J. and Lunt, T. 1992. Security for Object-Oriented Database Systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. Oakland (Ca), USA, 260--272. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Rabitti, F., Bertino, E., Kim, W., and Woelk, D. 1991. A Model of Authorization for Next-Generation Database Systems. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 16, 1 (March), 88--131. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Rozenberg, G., Ed. 1997. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation. vol. 1 (Foundations). World Scientific, Singapore. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Samarati, P., Bertino, E., and Jajodia, S. 1996. An Authorization Model for a Distributed Hypertext System. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 8, 4 (August), 555--562. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Sandhu, R. 1992a. Expressive Power of the Schematic Protection Model. J. Comput. Secu. 1, 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Sandhu, R. 1992b. The Typed Access Matrix Model. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. 122--136. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Sandhu, R. 1996. Role Hierarchies and Constraints for Lattice-based Access Controls. In Computer Security - Esorics'96, E. Bertino, H. Kurth, G. Martella, and E. Montolivo, Eds. Number 1146 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Rome, Italy, 65--79. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Sandhu, R., Coyne, E., Feinstein, H., and Youman, C. 1996. Role-Based Access Control Models. IEEE Comput. 29, 2 (February), 38--47. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Sandhu, R., Ferraiolo, D., and Kuhn, R. 2000. The NIST Model for Role-Based Access Control: Towards a Unified Standard. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Workshop on Role-Based Access Control. Berlin, Germany, 47--63. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Sandhu, R. and Ganta, S. 1993. Expressive Power of the Single-Object Typed Access Matrix Model. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Schurr, A. 1991. PROGRES: A VHL-language based on Graph Grammars. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Graph Grammars and their Application to Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 532. Springer-Verlag, 641--659. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. STRAWBERRY PROLOG. See http://www.dobrev.com/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Thomas, R. and Sandhu, R. 1997. Task-Based Authorization Controls (TBAC): Models for Active and Enterprise-Oriented Authorization Management. In Proceedings of the 11th IFIP Working Conference on Database Security. Lake Tahoe (CA), 136--151. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Ullman, J. 1989. Principles of Database and Knowledge Base Systems. vol. 1&2. Computer Science Press. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Winslett, M., Ching, N., Jones, V., and Slepchin, I. 1997. Using Digital Credentials on the World Wide Web. J. Comput. Secu. 5, 3. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. XSB. See http://xsb.sourceforge.net/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A logical framework for reasoning about access control models

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader