Reactive Policies for the Semantic Web

  • Piero A. Bonatti
  • Philipp Kärger
  • Daniel Olmedilla
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6088)

Abstract

Semantic Web policies are general statements defining the behavior of a system that acts on behalf of real users. These policies have various applications ranging from dynamic agent control to advanced access control policies. Although policies attracted a lot of research efforts in recent years, suitable representation and reasoning facilities allowing for reactive policies are not likewise developed. In this paper, we describe the concept of reactive Semantic Web policies. Reactive policies allow for the definition of events and actions, that is, they allow to define reactive behavior of a system acting on the Semantic Web. A reactive policy makes use of the tremendous amount of knowledge available on the Semantic Web in order to guide system behaviour while at the same time ensuring trusted and policy-compliant communication. We present a formal framework for expressing and enforcing such reactive policies in combination with advanced trust establishing techniques featuring an interplay between reactivity and agent negotiation. Finally, we explain how our approach was applied in a prototype which allows to define and enforce reactive Semantic Web policies on the Social Network and communication tool Skype.

References

  1. 1.
    Abel, F., De Coi, J.L., Henze, N., Koesling, A.W., Krause, D., Olmedilla, D.: Enabling advanced and context-dependent access control in rdf stores. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L.J.B., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alferes, J.J., Amador, R.: r 3- A foundational ontology for reactive rules. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) ODBASE’07. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 933–952. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alferes, J.J., Amador, R., Kärger, P., Olmedilla, D.: Towards reactive semantic web policies: Advanced agent control for the semantic web. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alferes, J.J., Amador, R., Kärger, P., Olmedilla, D.: Towards reactive semantic web policies—motivation scenario and implementation details. Technical report, L3S Research Center (October 2008), http://www.L3S.de/~kaerger/reports/reactive_policies.pdf
  5. 5.
    Alferes, J.J., May, W.: Evolution and reactivity for the web. In: Reasoning Web, pp. 134–172 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Becker, M.Y., Sewell, P.: Cassandra: Distributed access control policies with tunable expressiveness. In: POLICY 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Behrends, E., Fritzen, O., May, W., Schenk, F.: Combining eca rules with process algebras for the semantic web. In: RuleML, pp. 29–38 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Behrends, E., Fritzen, O., May, W., Schubert, D.: An eca engine for deploying heterogeneous component languages in the semantic web. In: Grust, T., Höpfner, H., Illarramendi, A., Jablonski, S., Mesiti, M., Müller, S., Patranjan, P.-L., Sattler, K.-U., Spiliopoulou, M., Wijsen, J. (eds.) EDBT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4254, pp. 887–898. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonatti, P.A., Samarati, P.: Regulating service access and information release on the web. In: CCS 2000, pp. 134–143. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bonatti, P.A., Duma, C., Fuchs, N., Nejdl, W., Olmedilla, D., Peer, J., Shahmehri, N.: Semantic web policies - a discussion of requirements and research issues. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 712–724. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bonatti, P.A., Olmedilla, D.: Driving and monitoring provisional trust negotiation with metapolicies. In: 6th IEEE Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY 2005), Stockholm, Sweden, June 2005, pp. 14–23. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Coi, J.L., Olmedilla, D.: A flexible policy-driven trust negotiation model. In: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, Silicon Valley, CA, USA (November 2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Coi, J.L., Olmedilla, D.: A review of trust management, security and privacy policy languages. In: International Conference on Security and Cryptography (SECRYPT 2008). INSTICC Press (July 2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Damianou, N., Dulay, N., Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: The ponder policy specification language. In: Sloman, M., Lobo, J., Lupu, E.C. (eds.) POLICY 2001. LNCS, vol. 1995, pp. 18–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uszok, A., et al.: Kaos policy and domain services: Toward a description-logic approach to policy representation, deconfliction, and enforcement. In: POLICY 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gavriloaie, R., Nejdl, W., Olmedilla, D., Seamons, K.E., Winslett, M.: No registration needed: How to use declarative policies and negotiation to access sensitive resources on the semantic web. In: Bussler, C.J., Davies, J., Fensel, D., Studer, R. (eds.) ESWS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3053, pp. 342–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gehani, N.H., Jagadish, H.V., Shmueli, O.: Composite event specification in active databases: Model and implementation. In: 18th VLDB Conference (1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grust, T., Höpfner, H., Illarramendi, A., Jablonski, S., Mesiti, M., Müller, S., Patranjan, P.-L., Sattler, K.-U., Spiliopoulou, M., Wijsen, J. (eds.): EDBT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4254. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kagal, L., Finin, T.W., Joshi, A.: A policy based approach to security for the semantic web. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 402–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kärger, P.: Advanced semantic web policies: Evolution reactivities, and priorities. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kärger, P., Kigel, E., Jaltar, V.Y.: Spox: combining reactive semantic web policies and social semantic data to control the behaviour of skype. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kärger, P., Kigel, E., Olmedilla, D.: Reactivity and social data: Keys to drive decisions in social network applications (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kärger, P., Siberski, W.: Guarding a walled garden - semantic privacy preferences for the social web. In: Proceedings of the 7th Extended Semantic Web Conference. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lobo, J., Bhatia, R., Naqvi, S.: A policy description language. In: Proc. of AAAI, pp. 291–298 (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    May, W., Alferes, J.J., Bry, F.: Towards generic query, update, and event languages for the semantic web. In: Ohlbach, H.J., Schaffert, S. (eds.) PPSWR 2004. LNCS, vol. 3208, pp. 19–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Papamarkos, G., Poulovassilis, A., Wood, P.T.: Event-condition-action rule languages for the semantic web. In: Cruz, I.F., Kashyap, V., Decker, S., Eckstein, R. (eds.) SWDB, pp. 309–327 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Seneviratne, O., Kagal, L., Berners-Lee, T.: Policy-aware content reuse on the web. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 553–568. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Subrahmanian, V.S., Bonatti, P.A., Dix, J., Eiter, T., Kraus, S., Ozcan, F., Ross, R.B.: Heterogenous Active Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tonti, G., Bradshaw, J.M., Jeffers, R., Montanari, R., Suri, N., Uszok, A.: Semantic web languages for policy representation and reasoning: A comparison of KAoS, Rei, and Ponder. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 419–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Twidle, K.P., Lupu, E., Dulay, N., Sloman, M.: Ponder2 - a policy environment for autonomous pervasive systems. In: POLICY (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Widom, J., Ceri, S. (eds.): Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules For Advanced Database Processing. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winslett, M.: An introduction to trust negotiation. In: Nixon, P., Terzis, S. (eds.) iTrust 2003. LNCS, vol. 2692, pp. 275–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Piero A. Bonatti
    • 1
  • Philipp Kärger
    • 2
  • Daniel Olmedilla
    • 3
  1. 1.Università di Napoli Federico IIItaly
  2. 2.L3S Research Center & Leibniz University of HannoverGermany
  3. 3.Telefónica Research & DevelopmentMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations