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:Anil Saldhana (Anil@redhat.com)
Date:Jan 20, 2009 6:04:10 pm
List:org.oasis-open.lists.xacml

A question I have is how many folks are really using this hierarchical profile in practice.

Daniel Engovatov wrote:

On Jan 14, 2009, at 10:54 PM, Rich.Levinson wrote:

* There needs to be a definition of "hierarchy". In particular, a "hierarchy" defn should state that the fundamental properties are that there must be a single root node with no parent, and that every other node in the hierarchy must have one and only one parent, and can have zero, one, or more children.

I am not sure why do you think this is a requirement. It is a normal use case to inherit policy from more then one parent, and "ancestors" attribute approach allows such models without undue restrictions.

in order to submit a request one has to somehow identify all the hierarchies the given node belongs to, all the hierarchies the node's parent(s) and ancestors to, and include an Attribute element for each.

And why is that a problem? Yes, if one wants "inheritance", graph needs to be defined, and attributes is a natural way to define it.

I suspect that at most one would need to collect all the normative representations of only the resource-id node (i.e. identify all the hierarchies it belongs to), then for each hierarchy, one would evaluate the policies that apply to that hierarchy.

Policy evaluation does not need to know anything about hierarchies that are represented with an "ancestor" attribute.

Daniel;