skip to main content
10.1145/2381716.2381862acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescubeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Comparison of policy specification languages for access control

Published:03 September 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Access control is the process of mediating every request to data and services maintained by a system and determining whether the request should be granted or denied. Expressiveness and flexibility are top requirements for an access control system together with, and usually in conflict with, simplicity and efficiency. In this paper, we discuss the main characteristics for access control specification languages and make a comparison on the basis of those characteristics.

References

  1. Nicodemos Damianou, Naranker Dulay, Emil Lupu, and Morris Sloman. The Ponder Policy Specification Language. LNCS, 1995:18--39, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Michael Hitchens and Vijay Varadharajan. Tower: A Language for Role Based Access Control. In POLICY '01: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, pages 88--106. Springer-Verlag, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. James A. Hoagland. Specifying and Implementing Security Policies Using LaSCO, the Language for Security Constraints on Objects. PhD thesis, University of California, Davis, CA, USA, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Jajodia, P. Samarati, and V. S. Subrahmanian. A logical language for expressing authorizations. In Proceedings of the 1997 Conference on Security and Privacy (S&P-97), pages 31--43, Los Alamitos, May 4--7 1997. IEEE Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G.-J. Ahn. The RCL 2000 language for specifying role-based authorization constraints. PhD thesis, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Johnson M., Chang P., Jeffers R., Bradshaw J., et al., KAoS Semantic Policy and Domain Services: An Application of DAML to Web Services-Based Grid Architectures, Proceedings of the AAMAS 03 workshop on Web Services and Agent-Based Engineering, Melbourne, Australia, July 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Mary Ellen Zurko, Rich Simon, Tom Sanfilippo, Mary Ellen. A User-Centered, Modular Authorization Service Built on an RBAC Foundation, 1999Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Christopher Alm, Michael Drouineaud. ORKA, Analysis of Existing Policy Languages.University of Hamburg, University of Bremen, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Anthony Boswell. Specification and validation of a security policy model. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(2):63--68, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Paul Ashley, Satoshi Hada, Guenter Karjoth, Calvin Powers, and Matthias Schunter. Enterprise privacy authorization language (epal 1.2), 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. http://www.rbjones.com/rbjpub/cs/csfm03.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards).XACML Language Proposal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. The Alloy Analyzer. Project homepage http://alloy.mit.edu/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Tonti G., Bradshaw J., Jeffers R., Montanari R., Suri N., and Uszok A., Semantic web languages for policy epresentation and reasoning: A comparison of KAoS, Rei and Ponder, Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA, Oct.2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Lalana Kagal. A Policy Language for the Me-Centric Project, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Carlos Ribeiro, Andre Zuquete, Paulo Ferreira and Paulo Guedes.SPL: An access control language for security policies with complex constraints.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Comparison of policy specification languages for access control

      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
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        CUBE '12: Proceedings of the CUBE International Information Technology Conference
        September 2012
        879 pages
        ISBN:9781450311854
        DOI:10.1145/2381716

        Copyright © 2012 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 3 September 2012

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader