Skip to main content

Selected Results and Related Issues of Confidentiality-Preserving Controlled Interaction Execution

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FoIKS 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 9616))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Controlled Interaction Execution has been developed as a security server for inference control shielding an isolated, logic-oriented information system when interacting over the time with a client by means of messages, in particular for query and transaction processing. The control aims at preserving confidentiality in a formalized sense, intuitively and simplifying rephrased as follows: Even when having (assumed) a priori knowledge, recording the interaction history, being aware of the details of the control mechanism, and unrestrictedly rationally reasoning, the client should never be able to infer the validity of any sentence declared as a potential secret in the security server’s confidentiality policy. To enforce this goal, for each of a rich variety of specific situations a dedicated censor has been designed. As far as needed, a censor distorts a functionally expected reaction message such that suitably weakened or even believably incorrect information is communicated to the client. In this article, we consider selected results of recent and ongoing work and discuss several issues for further research and development. The topics covered range from the impact of the underlying logic, whether propositional or first-order or for non-monotonic beliefs or an abstraction from any specific one, to the kind of the interactions, whether only queries or also view publishing or updates or revisions or even procedural programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Aggarwal, G., Bawa, M., Ganesan, P., Garcia-Molina, H., Kenthapadi, K., Motwani, R., Srivastava, U., Thomas, D., Xu, Y.: Two can keep a secret: a distributed architecture for secure database services. In: 2nd Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research, CIDR 2005, pp. 186–199. Online Proceedings (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ailamazyan, A.K., Gilula, M.M., Stolbushkin, A.P., Shvarts, G.F.: Reduction of a relational model with infinite domains to the finite-domain case. Russian version: Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 286, 308–311; English translation: Sov. Phys. Dokl. 31(1), 11–13 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Balliu, M., Dam, M., Guernic, G.L.: Encover: symbolic exploration for information flow security. In: Chong, S. (ed.) IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium, CSF 2012, pp. 30–44. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Beierle, C., Kern-Isberner, G.: A conceptual agent model based on a uniform approach to various belief operations. In: Mertsching, B., Hund, M., Aziz, Z. (eds.) KI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5803, pp. 273–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Bell, D.E., LaPadula, L.J.: Secure computer systems: a mathematical model, volume II. J. Comput. Sec. 4(2/3), 229–263 (1996). Reprint of MITRE Corporation (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Biskup, J.: For unknown secrecies refusal is better than lying. Data Knowl. Eng. 33(1), 1–23 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Biskup, J.: Security in Computing Systems - Challenges. Approaches and Solutions. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Biskup, J.: Dynamic policy adaption for inference control of queries to a propositional information system. J. Comput. Secur. 20, 509–546 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Biskup, J.: Inference-usability confinement by maintaining inference-proof views of an information system. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 7(1), 17–37 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Biskup, J.: Logic-oriented confidentiality policies for controlled interaction execution. In: Madaan, A., Kikuchi, S., Bhalla, S. (eds.) DNIS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7813, pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Biskup, J., Bonatti, P.A.: Lying versus refusal for known potential secrets. Data Knowl. Eng. 38(2), 199–222 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Biskup, J., Bonatti, P.A.: Controlled query evaluation for enforcing confidentiality in complete information systems. Int. J. Inf. Secur. 3(1), 14–27 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Biskup, J., Bonatti, P.A.: Controlled query evaluation for known policies by combining lying and refusal. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 40(1–2), 37–62 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Biskup, J., Bonatti, P.A.: Controlled query evaluation with open queries for a decidable relational submodel. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 50(1–2), 39–77 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Biskup, J., Bonatti, P.A., Galdi, C., Sauro, L.: Optimality and complexity of inference-proof data filtering and CQE. In: Kutyłowski, M., Vaidya, J. (eds.) ESORICS 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8713, pp. 165–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Biskup, J., Bring, M., Bulinski, M.: Confidentiality preserving evaluation of open relational queries. In: Morzy, T., Valduriez, P., Bellatreche, L. (eds.) ADBIS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9282, pp. 431–445. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Biskup, J., Dahn, C., Diekmann, K., Menzel, R., Schalge, D., Wiese, L.: Publishing inference-proof relational data: an implementation and experiments (2015) (submitted for publication)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Biskup, J., Embley, D.W., Lochner, J.H.: Reducing inference control to access control for normalized database schemas. Inf. Process. Lett. 106(1), 8–12 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Biskup, J., Gogolin, C., Seiler, J., Weibert, T.: Inference-proof view update transactions with forwarded refreshments. J. Comput. Secur. 19, 487–529 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Biskup, J., Hartmann, S., Link, S., Lochner, J.-H.: Efficient inference control for open relational queries. In: Foresti, S., Jajodia, S. (eds.) Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXIV. LNCS, vol. 6166, pp. 162–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Biskup, J., Hartmann, S., Link, S., Lochner, J.-H., Schlotmann, T.: Signature-based inference-usability confinement for relational databases under functional and join dependencies. In: Cuppens-Boulahia, N., Cuppens, F., Garcia-Alfaro, J. (eds.) DBSec 2012. LNCS, vol. 7371, pp. 56–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Biskup, J., Li, L.: On inference-proof view processing of XML documents. IEEE Trans. Dependable Sec. Comput. 10(2), 99–113 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Biskup, J., Preuß, M.: Database fragmentation with encryption: under which semantic constraints and a priori knowledge can two keep a secret? In: Wang, L., Shafiq, B. (eds.) DBSec 2013. LNCS, vol. 7964, pp. 17–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Biskup, J., Preuß, M.: Inference-proof data publishing by minimally weakening a database instance. In: Prakash, A., Shyamasundar, R. (eds.) ICISS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8880, pp. 30–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Biskup, J., Preuß, M., Wiese, L.: On the inference-proofness of database fragmentation satisfying confidentiality constraints. In: Lai, X., Zhou, J., Li, H. (eds.) ISC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7001, pp. 246–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Policy-based secrecy in the Runs & Systems framework and controlled query evaluation. In: Echizen, I., Kunihiro, N., Sasaki, R. (eds.) Advances in Information and Computer Security, IWSEC 2010, Short Papers, pp. 60–77. Information Processing Society of Japan (IPSJ) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Inference-Proof View Update Transactions with Minimal Refusals. In: Garcia-Alfaro, J., Navarro-Arribas, G., Cuppens-Boulahia, N., de Capitani di Vimercati, S. (eds.) DPM 2011 and SETOP 2011. LNCS, vol. 7122, pp. 104–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Revising belief without revealing secrets. In: Lukasiewicz, T., Sali, A. (eds.) FoIKS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7153, pp. 51–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Confidentiality enforcement by hybrid control of flows from abstract information states through program execution via declassification (2015) (submitted for publication)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Constructing inference-proof belief mediators. In: Samarati, P. (ed.) DBSec 2015. LNCS, vol. 9149, pp. 188–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: Preserving confidentiality while reacting on iterated queries and belief revisions. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 73(1–2), 75–123 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Biskup, J., Tadros, C.: On the simulation assumption for controlled interaction processing (to appear, 2016)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Biskup, J., Tadros, C., Wiese, L.: Towards controlled query evaluation for incomplete first-order databases. In: Link, S., Prade, H. (eds.) FoIKS 2010. LNCS, vol. 5956, pp. 230–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Biskup, J., Weibert, T.: Keeping secrets in incomplete databases. Int. J. Inf. Secur. 7(3), 199–217 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Biskup, J., Wiese, L.: Preprocessing for controlled query evaluation with availability policy. J. Comput. Secur. 16(4), 477–494 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Biskup, J., Wiese, L.: A sound and complete model-generation procedure for consistent and confidentiality-preserving databases. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 412, 4044–4072 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Bonatti, P.A., Kraus, S., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Foundations of secure deductive databases. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 7(3), 406–422 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bonatti, P.A., Petrova, I.M., Sauro, L.: Optimized construction of secure knowledge-base views. In: Calvanese, D., Konev, B. (eds.) International Workshop on Description Logics 2015. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1350. CEUR-WS.org (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bonatti, P.A., Sauro, L.: A confidentiality model for ontologies. In: Alani, H., Kagal, L., Fokoue, A., Groth, P., Biemann, C., Parreira, J.X., Aroyo, L., Noy, N., Welty, C., Janowicz, K. (eds.) ISWC 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8218, pp. 17–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Bordeaux, L., Hamadi, Y., Zhang, L.: Propositional satisfiability and constraint programming: a comparative survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 38(4), 12.1–12.54 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Börger, E., Grädel, E., Gurevich, Y.: The Classical Decision Problem. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Brachman, R.J., Levesque, H.J.: Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ciriani, V., De Capitani di Vermercati, S., Foresti, S., Jajodia, S., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P.: Combining fragmentation and encryption to protect privacy in data storage. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 13(3), 1–33 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Ciriani, V., De Capitani di Vermercati, S., Foresti, S., Samarati, P.: K-anonymity. In: Yu, T., Jajodia, S. (eds.) Secure Data Management in Decentralized Systems. Advances in Information Security, vol. 33, pp. 323–353. Springer, New York (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Cuppens, F., Gabillon, A.: Cover story management. Data Knowl. Eng. 37(2), 177–201 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. De Capitani di Vermercati, S., Foresti, S., Jajodia, S., Livraga, G., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P.: Fragmentation in presence of data dependencies. IEEE Trans. Dependable Sec. Comput. 11(6), 510–523 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Denning, D.E., Akl, S.G., Heckman, M., Lunt, T.F., Morgenstern, M., Neumann, P.G., Schell, R.R.: Views for multilevel database security. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 13(2), 129–140 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Denning, D.E., Schlörer, J.: Inference controls for statistical databases. IEEE Comput. 16(7), 69–82 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Dolzhenko, E., Ligatti, J., Reddy, S.: Modeling runtime enforcement with mandatory results automata. Int. J. Inf. Secur. 14(1), 47–60 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ebbinghaus, H.D., Flum, J.: Finite Model Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Fagin, R., Halpern, J.Y., Moses, Y., Vardi, M.Y.: Reasoning about Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Farkas, C., Jajodia, S.: The inference problem: a survey. SIGKDD Explor. 4(2), 6–11 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Fitting, M., Mendelsohn, R.L.: First-Order Modal Logic, Synthese Library, vol. 277. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  56. Friedman, N., Halpern, J.Y.: Plausibility measures and default reasoning. J. ACM 48(4), 648–685 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Fung, B.C.M., Wang, K., Chen, R., Yu, P.S.: Privacy-preserving data publishing: a survey of recent developments. ACM Comput. Surv. 42(4), 1–53 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Fung, B.C.M., Wang, K., Fu, A.W.C., Yu, P.S.: Introduction to Privacy-Preserving Data Publishing - Concepts and Techniques. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Ganapathy, V., Thomas, D., Feder, T., Garcia-Molina, H., Motwani, R.: Distributing data for secure database services. Trans. Data Priv. 5(1), 253–272 (2012)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  60. Gray III, J.W.: Toward a mathematical foundation for information flow security. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 21–35 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Halpern, J.Y., O’Neill, K.R.: Secrecy in multiagent systems. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 12(1), 1–47 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Katebi, H., Sakallah, K.A., Marques-Silva, J.P.: Empirical study of the anatomy of modern sat solvers. In: Sakallah, K.A., Simon, L. (eds.) SAT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6695, pp. 343–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  63. Levesque, H.J., Lakemeyer, G.: The Logic of Knowledge Bases. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Libkin, L.: Elements of Finite Model Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  65. Lunt, T.F., Denning, D.E., Schell, R.R., Heckman, M., Shockley, W.R.: The SeaView security model. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 16(6), 593–607 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Machanavajjhala, A., Kifer, D., Gehrke, J., Venkitasubramaniam, M.: L-diversity: privacy beyond k-anonymity. TKDD 1(1), 3 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Malik, S., Zhang, L.: Boolean satisfiability from theoretical hardness to practical success. Commun. ACM 52(8), 76–82 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Nerode, A., Shore, R.: Logic for Applications, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (1997)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  69. Ray, D., Ligatti, J.: A theory of gray security policies. In: Pernul, G., Ryan, P.Y.A., Weippl, E.R. (eds.) ESORICS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9327, pp. 481–499. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  70. Reiter, R.: What should a database know? Logic Program. 14, 127–153 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  71. Robinson, J.A., Voronkov, A. (eds.): Handbook of Automated Reasoning (in 2 volumes). Elsevier, MIT Press, Amsterdam, Cambridge (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  72. Sabelfeld, A., Sands, D.: Dimensions and principles of declassification. In: IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop, CSFW 2005, pp. 255–269. IEEE Computer Society (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Sandhu, R.S., Jajodia, S.: Polyinstantation for cover stories. In: Deswarte, Y., Quisquater, J.-J., Eizenberg, G. (eds.) ESORICS 1992. LNCS, pp. 307–328. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Schneider, F.B.: Enforceable security policies. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 3(1), 30–50 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Shoenfield, J.R.: Mathematical Logic. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Sicherman, G.L., de Jonge, W., van de Riet, R.P.: Answering queries without revealing secrets. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 8(1), 41–59 (1983)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  77. Spohn, W.: Ordinal conditional functions: A dynamic theory of epistemic states. In: Skyrms, B., Harper, W.L. (eds.) Irvine Conference on Probability and Causation. Causation in Decision, Belief Change, and Statistics, vol. II, pp. 105–134. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Studer, T., Werner, J.: Censors for boolean description logic. Trans. Data Priv. 7(3), 223–252 (2014)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  79. Sutcliff, G., Suttner, C.: The TPTP problem library for automated theorem proving. Technical report (2015). http://www.tptp.org

  80. Sutcliffe, G.: The TPTP problem library and associated infrastructure: The FOF and CNF parts, v3.5.0. J. Autom. Reason. 43(4), 337–362 (2009)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  81. Thalheim, B.: Entity-Relationship Modeling - Foundations of Database Technology. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. Traub, J.F., Yemini, Y., Wozniakowski, H.: The statistical security of a statistical database. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 9(4), 672–679 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Weissenbacher, G., Malik, S.: Boolean satisfiability solvers: techniques and extensions. In: Nipkow, T., Grumberg, O., Hauptmann, B. (eds.) Software Safety and Security - Tools for Analysis and Verification, pp. 205–253. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to sincerely thank all colleagues who have worked together with me on Controlled Interaction Execution, in particular the co-authors of joint publications. Moreover, I am specially indebted to Marcel Preuß and Cornelia Tadros for many helpful comments on an earlier draft. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge the longtime support of the German Research Council, DFG, under grants Bi 311/12 and SFB 876/A5.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joachim Biskup .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Biskup, J. (2016). Selected Results and Related Issues of Confidentiality-Preserving Controlled Interaction Execution. In: Gyssens, M., Simari, G. (eds) Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems. FoIKS 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9616. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30024-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30024-5_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30023-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30024-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics