atom feed43 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.xacmlRe: [xacml] Issue: Hierarchical profi...
FromSent OnAttachments
Rich.LevinsonJan 14, 2009 10:54 pm 
Daniel EngovatovJan 14, 2009 11:23 pm 
Rich.LevinsonJan 15, 2009 6:42 am 
Erik RissanenJan 15, 2009 6:52 am 
Rich.LevinsonJan 15, 2009 8:36 am 
Daniel EngovatovJan 15, 2009 11:09 am 
Anil SaldhanaJan 20, 2009 6:04 pm 
Hal LockhartJan 21, 2009 8:48 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 16, 2009 4:22 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 16, 2009 4:48 pm 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 16, 2009 5:40 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 16, 2009 5:59 pm 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 16, 2009 8:05 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 16, 2009 8:39 pm 
Erik RissanenFeb 17, 2009 3:37 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 17, 2009 7:40 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 17, 2009 7:48 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 17, 2009 11:19 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 17, 2009 8:33 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 18, 2009 10:15 am 
Seth ProctorFeb 18, 2009 10:29 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 18, 2009 11:02 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 18, 2009 12:37 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 18, 2009 12:51 pm 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 18, 2009 3:04 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 18, 2009 3:16 pm 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 18, 2009 6:54 pm 
Erik RissanenFeb 19, 2009 6:57 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 19, 2009 10:59 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 19, 2009 8:02 pm 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 19, 2009 9:11 pm 
Erik RissanenFeb 20, 2009 1:34 am 
Erik RissanenFeb 20, 2009 1:41 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 20, 2009 2:12 am 
Erik RissanenFeb 20, 2009 2:30 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 20, 2009 8:14 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 20, 2009 8:55 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 20, 2009 10:37 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 20, 2009 10:37 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 20, 2009 10:46 am 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 20, 2009 11:01 am 
Rich.LevinsonFeb 20, 2009 1:22 pm 
Daniel EngovatovFeb 20, 2009 3:03 pm 
Subject:Re: [xacml] Issue: Hierarchical profile appears ambiguous and inconsistent
From:Erik Rissanen (er@axiomatics.com)
Date:Jan 15, 2009 6:52:29 am
List:org.oasis-open.lists.xacml

Rich.Levinson wrote:

I am trying to understand what policies are supposed to do with the definitions in the spec. i.e. it is the spec that says in section 3.2 that all the parent and ancestor nodes need to be assembled in the request context. What "policy evaluation" are you referring to? Are you saying what I indicated in original email that a policy does not need to know anything about hierarchies that the resource-id node does not belong to?

Hi Rich,

I don't understand all the questions you have, but here's the basic approach of the profile in a simple example.

Assume the following simple hierarchy:

A <- B <- C

If someone requests access to C, the request will contain these attributes. this is from the top of my head, so it might be slightly inaccurate and I might have forgotten some of the attributes, but hopefully you get the idea.

<Resource> resource-id = C parent-id = B self-or-ancestor = C self-or-ancestor = B self-or-ancestor = A </Resource>

All these attributes are there so it is possible to write policies which apply to parts of the hierarchy, not just individual nodes.

For example:

<Target> resource-id = C </Target>

Matches only the resource C, nothing else.

<Target> parent-id = B </Target>

matches the immediate children of B. In the example this is C, but if C had a sibling, it would also match.

<Target> ancestor-or-self = B </Target>

Matches B or any node below B. In this case also C.

Best regards, Erik