Re: [xacml] Re: Boolean Policy resolution

[bill parducci <bill@parducci.net>]

conversely you have the example:

your dept wants to make sure that requirements of corporate AND 
department are met before allowing access. someone at corporate enters a 
typo that causes the policy to return 'not applicable'. user granted 
access even though they would have been denied such access had the 
policy been written correctly.

b

>>kinda pulls the teeth from an AND clause, doesn't it?
>>
> 
> I disagree.  A predicate evaluates to "NOT-APPLICABLE" if the policy
> was not intended to apply to the authorization query that is presented.
> So removing the predicate from the calculation fits the natural semantics.