Advertisement

Automated and Efficient Analysis of Role-Based Access Control with Attributes

  • Alessandro Armando
  • Silvio Ranise
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7371)

Abstract

We consider an extension of the Role-Based Access Control model in which rules assign users to roles based on attributes. We consider an open (allow-by-default) policy approach in which rules can assign users negated roles thus preventing access to the permissions associated to the role. The problems of detecting redundancies and inconsistencies are formally stated. By expressing the conditions on the attributes in the rules with formulae of theories that can be efficiently decided by Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solvers, we characterize the decidability and complexity of the problems of detecting redundancies and inconsistencies. The proof of the result is constructive and based on an algorithm that repeatedly solves SMT problems. An experimental evaluation with synthetic benchmark problems shows the practical viability of our technique.

Keywords

Access Control Background Theory Access Control Policy Role Base Access Control Authorization Rule 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Adi, K., Bouzida, Y., Hattak, I., Logrippo, L., Mankovskii, S.: Typing for Conflict Detection in Access Control Policies. In: Babin, G., Kropf, P., Weiss, M. (eds.) MCETECH 2009. LNBIP, vol. 26, pp. 212–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Kahtani, M., Sandhu, R.: A Model for Attribute-Based User-Role Assignment. In: Proc. of 18th Annual Comp. Sec. App. Conf., Las Vegas, Nevada (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Al-Kahtani, M., Sandhu, R.: Induced Role Hierarchies with Attribute-Based RBAC. In: Proc. of 8th ACM SACMAT (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Kahtani, M., Sandhu, R.: Rule-based RBAC with negative authorization. In: Proc. of 20th Annual Comp. Sec. App. Conf., pp. 405–415 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alberti, F., Armando, A., Ranise, S.: Efficient Symbolic Automated Analysis of Administrative Role Based Access Control Policies. In: Proc. of 6th ACM Symp. on Info., Computer and Comm. Security, ASIACCS 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ardagna, C., De Capitani di Vimercati, S., Paraboschi, S., Pedrini, E., Samarati, P., Verdicchio, M.: Expressive and Deployable Access Control in Open Web Service Applications. IEEE Trans. on Serv. Comp. (TSC) 4(2), 96–109 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Armando, A., Ranise, S.: Automated Symbolic Analysis of ARBAC-Policies. In: Cuellar, J., Lopez, J., Barthe, G., Pretschner, A. (eds.) STM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6710, pp. 17–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Autrel, F., Cuppens, F., Cuppens, N., Coma, C.: MotOrBAC 2: a security policy tool. In: 3rd Conf. SARSSI, pp. 13–17 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Satisfiability modulo theories: introduction and applications. Commun. ACM 54, 69–77 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Enderton, H.B.: A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, New York (1972)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fisler, K., Krishnamurthi, S., Meyerovich, L.A., Tschantz, M.C.: Verification and change-impact analysis of access control policies. In: Int. Conf. on Sw Eng. (ICSE), pp. 196–206 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hughes, G., Bultan, T.: Automated Verification of Access Control Policies Using a SAT Solver. Int. J. on Sw Tools for Tech. Trandf. (STTT) 10(6), 473–534 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jajodia, S., Samarati, P., Sapino, M.L., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Flexible support for multiple access control policies. ACM Trans. DB Syst. 26, 214–260 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kamoda, H., Yamaoka, M., Matsuda, S., Broda, K., Sloman, M.: Access Control Policy Analysis Using Free Variable Tableaux. Trans. of Inform. Proc. Soc. of Japan, 207–221 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korovin, K., Voronkov, A.: GoRRiLA and Hard Reality. In: Clarke, E., Virbitskaite, I., Voronkov, A. (eds.) PSI 2011. LNCS, vol. 7162, pp. 243–250. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuhn, D.R., Coyne, E.J., Weil, T.R.: Adding Attributes to Role Based Access Control. IEEE Computer 43(6), 79–81 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lahiri, S.K., Musuvathi, M.: An Efficient Decision Procedure for UTVPI Constraints. In: Gramlich, B. (ed.) FroCos 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3717, pp. 168–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, N., Mitchell, J.C.: DATALOG with Constraints: A Foundation for Trust Management Languages. In: Dahl, V. (ed.) PADL 2003. LNCS, vol. 2562, pp. 58–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li, N., Mitchell, J.C.: RT: A Role-based Trust-management Framework. In: 3rd DARPA Infor. Surv. Conf. and Exp. (DISCEX III), pp. 201–212 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lin, D., Rao, P., Bertino, E., Li, N., Lobo, K.: EXAM: a comprehensive environment for the analysis of access control policies. IJIS 9, 253–273 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: Reconciling Role Based Management and Role Based Access Control. In: 2nd ACM Ws. on Role Based Acc. Contr., pp. 135–142 (1997)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mankai, M., Logrippo, L.: Access Control Policies: Modeling and Validation. In: Proc. of NOTERE, pp. 85–91 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nelson, C.G., Oppen, D.: Simplification by Cooperating Decision Procedures. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems 1(2), 245–257 (1979)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ranise, S., Tinelli, C.: The SMT-LIB Standard: Version 1.2, http://goedel.cs.uiowa.edu/smtlib/papers/format-v1.2-r06.08.30.pdf
  25. 25.
    Ribeiro, C., Zúquete, A., Ferreira, P., Guedes, P.: Security Policy Consistency. In: 1st Ws. on Rule-Based Constr. Reas. and Progr. CoRR cs.LO/0006045 (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Samarati, P., De Capitani di Vimercati, S.: Access Control: Policies, Models, and Mechanisms. In: Focardi, R., Gorrieri, R. (eds.) FOSAD 2000. LNCS, vol. 2171, pp. 137–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sandhu, R., Coyne, E., Feinstein, H., Youmann, C.: Role-Based Access Control Models. IEEE Computer 2(29), 38–47 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sebastiani, R.: Lazy Satisfiability Modulo Theories. Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation, JSAT 3, 141–224 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shaikh, R., Adi, K., Logrippo, L., Mankovski, S.: Inconsistency Detection Method for Access Control Policies. In: IEEE 6th IAS, pp. 204–209 (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tarjan, R.E.: Efficiency of a Good But Not Linear Set Union Algorithm. Journal of the ACM 22(2), 215–225 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
    Yu, H., Xie, Q., Che, H.: Research on Description Logic Based Conflict Detection Methods for RB-RBAC Model. In: 4th Int. Conf. on AMT, pp. 335–339 (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yuan, E., Tong, J.: Attributed Based Access Control (ABAC) for Web Services. In: Proc. of IEEE ICWS, pp. 561–569 (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Armando
    • 1
    • 2
  • Silvio Ranise
    • 2
  1. 1.DISTUniversità degli Studi di GenovaItalia
  2. 2.Security and Trust UnitFBK-IrstTrentoItalia

Personalised recommendations