OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xacml message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [xacml] AzApi Question


Hi Duane,

Thanks for the question. Consider this a preliminary answer to make sure we are "on the same page". I have only briefly looked at OpenSSO, however, what I have seen appears to be compatible with what we are proposing.
In particular, which I explained at last tc mgt in first abbreviated presentation and mentioned today on slide 4, bullet1, sub-bullet 1, was that application to AzApi interface on slide 6, checkPermission, for example, would have the Permission represented by a String identifying the "resource type", which may or may not be implicit in the resource name.

The basic idea is that we do not want application AzApi to be any more complicated than existing APIs currently in use, i.e. an application AzApi should only carry the information necessary to be passed between the appl and az provider, nothing else. The idea is that each container type will have its own notion of what an application is expected to be able to do, and a convention for accessing container-provided/supported services. As such an AzApi implementation would tailor the "upper level" AzApi to be consistent with how the container provider wants its applications to interact, if at all, with the authorization service.

For example: existing checkPermission is how Java "container" enables appl to access its az service. If one wanted to also have appls access az service that was a xacml pdp for certain resource types, the implementor of AzApi could provide one upper level interface that had, for example, 3 params: resource-type, resource-name, action, where for the xacml pdp supported types, the appl AzApi impl would submit the request using the lower level api, and for the existing permission-type requests the resource type would be converted to a Permission object and submitted to existing checkPermission capabilities. An alternative strategy would be leave checkPermission as is, and pick up the XACML-PDP supported permission from the Policy.implies SPI and submit, as above using the lower level AzApi.
That being said, wrt OpenSSO, possibly an initial project for AzApi would be to adapt into this environment, which, at a glance, might provide some additional reqts that have not been addressed yet, such as encrypting attrs, etc. The objective is to work with all existing environments where there is interest and resources available to create such implementations.

Again, I have only glanced at OpenSSO, so there may be things the discussion above does not directly address, but I would be happy to explore it in more depth if you can provide some explicit pointers to references that characterize the specific use cases and classes involved (i.e. I did not readily find the XACMLRequestProcessor you mentioned).

    Thanks,
    Rich


Duane DeCouteau wrote:
4A842DEC.70507@sbcglobal.net" type="cite">Rich,

Could you provide a written comparison between the proposed API and Sun's XacmlRequestProcessor and use of OpenSSO.  Both have been implemented in the NHIN 2.1 release and were key to RSA2008 and XSPA demonstrations.

Regards,

Duane


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]