Usage Control in Service-Oriented Architectures

Usage control governs the handling of sensitive data after it has been given away. The enforcement of usage control requirements is a challenge because the service requester in general has no control over the service provider's information processing devices. We analyze applicable trust models, conclude that observation-based enforcement is often more appropriate than enforcement by direct control over the service provider's actions, and present a logical architecture that blends both forms of enforcement with the business logics of serviceoriented architectures.

[1]  Christian Schaefer,et al.  DUKE--Distributed Usage Control Enforcement , 2007, Eighth IEEE International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY'07).

[2]  Ramakrishnan Srikant,et al.  Hippocratic Databases , 2002, VLDB.

[3]  Dieter Gollmann,et al.  Computer Security – ESORICS 2003 , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[4]  Christian Schaefer,et al.  Enforcement for Usage Control-An Overview of Control Mechanisms Deliverables 1 and 2 , 2006 .

[5]  Tzilla Elrad,et al.  Aspect-Oriented Software Development , 2004 .

[6]  Philip Robinson,et al.  Security and Trust in IT Business Outsourcing: a Manifesto , 2007, STM.

[7]  Ravi S. Sandhu,et al.  Enhancing data authenticity and integrity in P2P systems , 2005, IEEE Internet Computing.

[8]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Provisions and Obligations in Policy Rule Management , 2003, Journal of Network and Systems Management.

[9]  Alexander Pretschner,et al.  Distributed usage control , 2006, CACM.

[10]  Michael Waidner,et al.  Platform for Enterprise Privacy Practices: Privacy-Enabled Management of Customer Data , 2002, Privacy Enhancing Technologies.

[11]  Christian Schaefer,et al.  A Policy Language for Distributed Usage Control , 2007, ESORICS.

[12]  Lujo Bauer,et al.  Edit automata: enforcement mechanisms for run-time security policies , 2005, International Journal of Information Security.

[13]  Xin Wang,et al.  XrML -- eXtensible rights Markup Language , 2002, XMLSEC '02.

[14]  Ravi S. Sandhu,et al.  Peer-to-peer access control architecture using trusted computing technology , 2005, SACMAT '05.

[15]  Birgit Pfitzmann,et al.  Service-oriented Assurance - Comprehensive Security by Explicit Assurances , 2006, Quality of Protection.

[16]  Andreas Schaad,et al.  Delegation of obligations , 2002, Proceedings Third International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks.

[17]  G. Goth.  Mobile devices present integration challenges , 1999 .

[18]  Birgit Pfitzmann,et al.  A Toolkit for Managing Enterprise Privacy Policies , 2003, ESORICS.

[19]  Úlfar Erlingsson,et al.  SASI enforcement of security policies: a retrospective , 1999, Proceedings DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition. DISCEX'00.

[20]  C. Goth.  The ins and outs of IT outsourcing , 1999 .

[21]  Dean Povey.  Optimistic security: a new access control paradigm , 1999, NSPW '99.

[22]  Alexander Pretschner,et al.  On Obligations , 2005, ESORICS.

[23]  R. Sandhu,et al.  The UCON ABC Usage Control Model JAEHONG , 2004 .

[24]  Paul C. van Oorschot.  Revisiting Software Protection , 2003, ISC.

[25]  Marvin V. Zelkowitz,et al.  Programming Languages: Design and Implementation , 1975 .

[26]  Lujo Bauer,et al.  Composing security policies with polymer , 2005, PLDI '05.

[27]  P. V. Oorschot,et al.  Software Protection and Application Security : Understanding the Battleground ? , 2003 .