Advertisement

Towards Unifying Semantic Constraints and Security Constraints

  • Joachim Biskup
  • Barbara Sprick
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2582)

Abstract

Modern information systems must respect certain restrictions in order to guarantee the proper and desired functionality. Semantic constraints help to prevent inconsistencies in the stored data resulting from faulty updates. Security constraints are to maintain integrity, secrecy and availability over updates and over queries. In this paper we design an unifying framework for both kinds of constraints in order to study interactions between them. We view a distributed information system as a multi-agent system in which all components of the system are seen as agents. We present a temporal and epistemic logic for the defined framework and show in an example how security constraints and semantic constraints can be expressed in this framework.

Keywords

Temporal Logic Multiagent System Accessibility Relation Epistemic Logic Deontic Logic 
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. [CD96]
    Frederic Cuppens and Robert Demolombe. A deontic logic for reasoning about confidentiality. In J. Carmo M. Brown, editor, Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems,Workshops in Computing. Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [CD97]
    Frederic Cuppens and Robert Demomlombe. Modal logical framework for security policies. In Ybigniew Ras and Andrzeij Skowron, editors, Foundations of Intelligent Systems, volume 1325 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 579–589. Springer, October 1997.Google Scholar
  3. [CGH99]
    Marcos A. Castilho, Olivier Gasquet, and Andreas Herzig. Formalizing action and change in modal logic I: the frame problem. Journal of Logic and Computation, 9(5):701–735, 1999.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [ECSD98]
    H-D. Ehrich, C. Caleiro, A. Sernadas, and G. Denker. Logics for Databases and Information Systems, chapter 6, pages 167–198. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. [FHMV96]
    Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses, and Moshe Y. Vardi. Reasoning about Knowledge. The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. [HS98]
    Michael N. Huhns and Munindar P. Singh, editors. Readings in Agents. Morgan Kaufman, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. [JS90]
    Sushil Jajodia and Ravi Sandhu. Polyinstantiation integrity in multilevel relations. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 104–115, May 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [KR94]
    Paul J. Krasucki and R. Ramanujam. Knowledge and the ordering of events in distributed systems; extended abstract. In Proceedings Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge, pages 267–283. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. [Lam94]
    Leslie Lamport. A temporal logic of actions. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3):872–923, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [LDS+88]
    T. Lunt, D. Denning, R. Schell, M. Heckmann, and W. Shockley. The seaview security model. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 218–233, 1988.Google Scholar
  11. [Maz95]
    Antoni Mazurkiewicz. Introduction to trace theory. In The Book of Traces, chapter 1, pages 1–42. World Scientific, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. [MH69]
    John McCarthy and Patrick J. Hayes. Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In B. Meltzer and D. Michie, editors, Machine Intelligence 4, pages 463–502. Edinburgh University Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  13. [MOP89]
    Antoni Mazurkiewicz, A. Ochmanski, and Wojciech Penczek. Concurrent systems and inevitability. Theoretical Computer Science, 64:281–304, 1989.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [MP92]
    Manna and Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. [Nie97]
    Peter Niebert. A Temporal Logic for the Specification and Verification of Distributed Behavior. PhD thesis, Universität Hildesheim, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. [Pen93]
    Wojciech Penczek. Temporal logics for trace systems: on automated verification. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science, 4(1):31–68, 1993.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. [Ram96a]
    R. Ramanujam. Local knowledge assertions in a changing world (extended abstract). In Proceedings Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge, pages 1–17. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. [Ram96b]
    R. Ramanujam. Locally linear time temporal logic. In LICS, volume 11, pages 118–127, New Jersey, 1996. IEEE.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. [Rei90]
    Raymond Reiter. On asking what a database knows. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Computational Logic, pages 95–113. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar
  20. [Rei91]
    Wolfgang Reisig. Concurrent temporal logic. SFB-Bericht 342/7/91 B, Technische Univ. München, Inst. für Informatik, August 1991.Google Scholar
  21. [Sha97]
    Murray Shanahan. Solving the Frame Problem. The MIT Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  22. [SL93]
    Richard B. Scherl and Hector J. Levesque. The frame problem and knowledge-producing actions. In Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-93), pages 689–697, Washington, D.C., USA, 1993. AAAI Press/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. [Thi95]
    P. S. Thiagarajan. A trace consistent subset of PTL. In International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 438–452, 1995.Google Scholar
  24. [vdHM92]
    W. van der Hoek and J. J. C. Meyer. Making some issues of implicit knowledge explicit. International Journal on Foundations of Computer Science, 3(2):193–223, 1992.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [Wei99]
    Gerhard Weiss, editor. Multiagent Systems. The MIT Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  26. [Woo00]
    Michael Wooldridge. Reasoning about rational agents. The MIT Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, 2000.MATHGoogle Scholar
  27. [WSQ94]
    Marianne Winslett, Kenneth Smith, and Xiaolei Qian. Formal query languages for secure relational databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(4):626–662, December 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joachim Biskup
    • 1
  • Barbara Sprick
    • 1
  1. 1.Fachbereich Informatik Lehrstuhl 6Universität DortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations