Subject: DRAFT minutes from F2F (amended)
F2F Meeting - Oct. 20, 2003 - BEA, San Jose Attendance: Frank Siebenlist Anne Anderson Tim Moses Polar Humenn Daniel Engovatov Bill Parducci Michiharu Kudo Michael McIntosh Anthony Nadalin MaryAnn Hondo Jacques Durand Hal Lockhart Reviewed Work Items: (minutes refer to discussion topics by Work Item number) 2. Seth will now Champion for the clarified version of this WI. It refers to information needed to configure a PDP, included either in a Request, in a Policy, or possibly in a 3rd document type. A new item(#41) has been created to cover generalizing classification of entities and declaration (third schema to represent?) Daniel will address this by Nov. 3. 7. Proposes that condition references to be used to allow for reuse of conditions. Limited to conditions within the same policy. Proposal is fairly complete and is ready for review and decision. Provide the rationale: "reuse of conditions in Rules that may have different Targets." 8. Proposes that rule references to be used to allow for reuse of rules. May span across policies. This implies that the rule becomes the lowest administrative unit. This is dependent upon the decision of #19. Decision of the group is that #19 is not needed since the use case may be resolved having policies containing single rules. Therefore this item is closed as well. 9. Proposes extended syntax to address hierarchical Subject, Actions and Resources. Concern is that it is Resource specific and that it may be difficult to address the intricacies of any given Resource domain. It was decided that hierarchical polices and hierarchical requests (new WI, #42) be split apart for discussion and consideration. 10. Proposes extended syntax for Combining Algorithms to allow for the influence of rule combination evaluation by parameters of the rules themselves. There is general agreement on the value of this approach, however it is not thought to be widely required. Therefore the feeling is that this should be handled via an extension point added to the schema. This WI is therefore closed and the topic taken up in #11. 12. Proposes environment attributes for Target. VOTE: approve as proposed - 8 FOR, 1 Abstain (Daniel, pending discussion of function extensions). Closed. 16. Determined that this doesn$B!G(Bt introduce anything new to specification. Closed. 17. Determined that this doesn$B!G(Bt introduce anything new to specification. Closed. 19. Closed in junction with discussion of #8. 26. Closed because there is not a strong use case for the XACML 2.0 time frame and it would be difficult to implement due to semantic complexities. 29. Proposes delegation of policy evaluation and combination with the constraint that authorization assertions be passed with requests from remote (trusted) systems. The scope of the problem is not fully understood by the group and the proposal was made to pursue administrative policy solutions first, then return to this issue. Also includes #38 (placing conditionson members of the delegation chain for operating on policies.) 30. Proposed that policy may be passed with an access request. There isconcern that this will create issues with combinations of other applicable policies. It has been suggested that there the use case may be addressed by making remote PAP accessible to local PDP. This mechanism is related to #29 & #38 and will be discussed in the context of these issues. 35. Proposes that there is policy specifically developed to cover the return of missing attributes in decisions with Not Applicable results. It has been suggested that this is covered by the current specification. Documentation that details how this may be treated in XACML needs to begenerated. 36. Proposes that PDP have formally defined access control mechanism to downstream PDPs. This is not consistent with what was generally understood by the group from the original WI. There is concern that the scope of this problem is outside of what is practically addressable in XACML. Further clarification is necessary. This will likely tie into the discussion of #29, #30 & #38. 37. Proposes a shorthand model for passing multiple elements. Deferred until tomorrow (rest of group arrives). 38. Covered in #30. Deferred pending outcome of #30. 40. Proposes a general Policy Assertion and Policy Query in SAML. Two non-conflicting proposals: one creates an XACML PolicyStatement and XACML PolicyQuery, while other one creates a SAML PolicyStatement and PolicyQuery, from which the XACML-specific forms would be derived. This will be discussed further on the e-mail list. +++ F2F Meeting - Oct. 21, 2003 - BEA, San Jose Attendance: Frank Siebenlist Anne Anderson Tim Moses Polar Humenn Daniel Engovatov Simon Godik Bill Parducci Michiharu Kudo Michael McIntosh Rebekah Lepro Hal Lockhart Steve Anderson Reviewed the discussions of Monday$B!G(Bs meeting. Anne provided a historical review of derivation of single attributevalue model in current spec. (minutes refer to discussion topics by Work Item number) 37. Based on the general belief that this proposal will not affect XPath attribute queries, the consensus is that this item be approved pending further clarification (cardinality & descriptive schema changes). Rebekah will provide a first pass at the changes for the Editor. Hierarchical authorization issues: 9. Resources - If you want to support request that specify the resourceas a hierarchy (specifically, XML), there must be instance at request. Wildcards are allowed in policies about hierarchical entities. 42. Requests - hierarchical resource requests MUST use the $B!H(Bscope$B!I(B attribute when intentionally requesting resources with subordinate datamembers (vs. using /* in an XPath expression). Clarification is required to define how responses for situations where hierarchical resources without descendants are queried for descendant access. Policy Administration: A number of proposals were discussed, however no clear solution arose as the majority of the session involved the expression of the requirements. A higher order requirement proposed by Frank is the ability to evaluate policies taking into consideration $B!H(Badmin$B!I(B of the policy to allow for policy chain decisions. +++ F2F Meeting - Oct. 22, 2003 - BEA, San Jose Attendance: Frank Siebenlist Anne Anderson Tim Moses Polar Humenn Simon Godik Bill Parducci Michael McIntosh Rebekah Lepro Hal Lockhart Steve Anderson Anthony Nadalin MaryAnn Hondo Jacques Durand Reviewed the discussions of Tuesday$B!G(Bs meeting. Anne reviewed her Administrative Policy proposal. Frank$B!G(Bs and Polar will post their respective AP proposals to the mailing list. Anne & Tim proposed that the XACML TC continue its work on the current WSPL proposal, focusing on the authorization policy constraints of WebServices. The premise is that this work adopt/integrate the efforts of proposed policy advertising committees as (as yet undefined in Oasis & W3C). Until such time the group would provide examples of how this mechanism would work; the intent of the group is that this non-normative output would be replaced/merged with forthcoming standards in this area. Scope of proposed work: 1. Subset of XACML suitable for describing conditions on access control related attributes that are: (1). required for accessing a service; (2).available for a presentation service accessor. NORMATIVE. 2. Combining subset instances from above to determine a mutually acceptable set of access control related attributes. NORMATIVE. 3. Examples of how such instances are associated with WSDL at message, operation port type, etc. NON-NORMATIVE. The group decided that this scope is acceptable and that work will continue as defined above. Tim reviewed an approach for LDAP storage of policies to address many-to-many PDP/PAP relationships. The topic was also raised as to whether remote policy requests should be considered.