[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml-users] Help on Condition ? <-- Obligations
Hi, I don't want Obligation to be used for informing the end users the reason why something was denied. It has its own use. I want to keep the Obligation to be used as a condition for Policy- based decision making process. However, this Obligation condition is different from what works on the server side with PDP and other Policy elements (they are the "normal" conditions). This is a client side condition. For example, PDP has already ruled that this user will be granted access and returned the results to the user side. However, the Obligation says that the user must sign the license agreement before it can proceed. Therefore, the Obligation expresses something that the PDP, Policies and the server-side variables alone may not determine. Then, the XACML and Obligation compliant client must present the license page to the end user and return the user agreeing or not to the PDP side. Then, the all conditions are met and the user may proceed to the next step. An XACML system must allow this two-step permission process to work. If someone wants to know the reason why some policy denied access as the DPD Decision, in my opinion, there should be some additional element with the Decision to explain what Policy denied access (however, expressing such may become complex if that was a result of combinations of policies - or it may not make a practical sense at all to the end user if it was rejected by some seemingly unrelated matter). Alternatively, the end user may ask "why" to get an additional answer? Seth, I have not been following V3 development. Are there changes on Obligations from that of V1 and 2? Also, are there good use cases for the element? In your opinion, the Obligation is the place for the policy decision reason to be attached? Isn't there some other better place for such? Thanks, Yoichi -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yoichi Takayama, PhD Senior Research Fellow RAMP Project MELCOE (Macquarie E-Learning Centre of Excellence) MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY Phone: +61 (0)2 9850 9073 Fax: +61 (0)2 9850 6527 www.mq.edu.au www.melcoe.mq.edu.au/projects/RAMP/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY: CRICOS Provider No 00002J This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Macquarie E-Learning Centre Of Excellence (MELCOE) or Macquarie University. On 11/12/2008, at 11:11 AM, Bill Parducci wrote: > There is a current proposal to create dynamic Obligations within V3. > We are just working through a discussion re: if Obligations should > handle the "decision advice" aspects or if we should have a specific > attribute for indicating why decision was made. > > b > > On Dec 11, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Oleg Gryb wrote: > >> In regards specific requirements, please do consider adding >> expressions to obligations as I and other people had suggested in >> the past. It would make the obligations more dynamic. Example: I >> want to return an error message: "The access to the bill pay >> service has been denied because you exceeded the total maximum of >> $10000 in 6-month period" where $10000 and 6-month are environment >> attributes. I didn't find a way of creating such an obligation >> within current spec. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: xacml-users-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > For additional commands, e-mail: xacml-users-help@lists.oasis-open.org >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]