Advertisement

Towards Formal Semantics for ODRL Policies

  • Simon SteyskalEmail author
  • Axel Polleres
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9202)

Abstract

Most policy-based access control frameworks explicitly model whether execution of certain actions (read, write, etc.) on certain assets should be permitted or denied and usually assume that such actions are disjoint from each other, i.e. there does not exist any explicit or implicit dependency between actions of the domain. This in turn means, that conflicts among rules or policies can only occur if those contradictory rules or policies constrain the same action. In the present paper - motivated by the example of ODRL 2.1 as policy expression language - we follow a different approach and shed light on possible dependencies among actions of access control policies. We propose an interpretation of the formal semantics of general ODRL policy expressions and motivate rule-based reasoning over such policy expressions taking both explicit and implicit dependencies among actions into account. Our main contributions are (i) an exploration of different kinds of ambiguities that might emerge based on explicit or implicit dependencies among actions, and (ii) a formal interpretation of the semantics of general ODRL policies based on a defined abstract syntax for ODRL which shall eventually enable to perform rule-based reasoning over a set of such policies.

Keywords

Formal Semantic Abstract Syntax Access Control Policy Deontic Logic Boolean Formula 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cabrio, E., Palmero Aprosio, A., Villata, S.: These are your rights - a natural language processing approach to automated RDF licenses generation. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 255–269. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Coi, J.L., Olmedilla, D., Bonatti, P.A., Sauro, L.: Protune: a framework for semantic web policies. In: International Semantic Web Conference (Posters & Demos), vol. 401, p. 128 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fowler, M., Scott, K.: UML distilled - a brief guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley-Longman (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    García, R., Gil, R., Gallego, I., Delgado, J.: Formalising ODRL semantics using web ontologies. In: Proc. 2nd Intl. ODRL Workshop, pp. 1–10 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holzer, M., Katzenbeisser, S., Schallhart, C.: Towards formal semantics for ODRL. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on the Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL), Vienna, Austria, April 22–23, pp. 137–148 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iannella, R., Guth, S.: Odrl version 2.0 common vocabulary. W3C ODRL Community Group (2012). http://www.w3.org/community/odrl/two/vocab/
  7. 7.
    Iannella, R., Guth, S., Pähler, D., Kasten, A.: Odrl: Open digital rights language 2.1. W3C ODRL Community Group (2012). http://www.w3.org/community/odrl/
  8. 8.
    Kasten, A., Grimm, R.: Making the semantics of ODRL and URM explicit using web ontologies. In: Virtual Goods, pp. 77–91 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kencana Ramli, C.D.P., Nielson, H.R., Nielson, F.: XACML 3.0 in answer set programming. In: Albert, E. (ed.) LOPSTR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7844, pp. 89–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pucella, R., Weissman, V.: A Formal Foundation for ODRL. CoRR, abs/cs/0601085 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rotolo, A., Villata, S., Gandon, F.: A deontic logic semantics for licenses composition in the web of data. In: Int’l Conf. on Artificial Intelligence and Law ICAIL, pp. 111–120 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Steyskal, S., Polleres, A.: Defining expressive access policies for linked data using the ODRL ontology 2.0. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Semantic Systems, SEMANTICS 2014, Leipzig, Germany, September 4–5, pp. 20–23 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vienna University of Economics and BusinessViennaAustria
  2. 2.Siemens AGViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations