[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: AW: [xacml] string-regexp-match function on individual resource-idvalues as an alternative to the xpath-node-equal/match function?
Hi Jan, See a small comment inline, which I know the history of. Jan Herrmann wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > to start I have some little questions concerning the processing you > described. > > In case 2 you will always have to generate a resource-id value for > each node first (e.g. /objects/book). > > Than in sub case 2a you use this string in the string-regexp-match > function. > > What happens exactly in sub case 2b? > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book, /Objects/book) > > While you go through each of the 12M resource-id values (more > precisely: nodes in this case), do you always have to check if the > node is equal to one of the 1M book nodes selected by the second > parameter? > > Further I am wondering what the section in the spec (line 4908ff -see > below) actually means: > > “The function [xpath-node-equal] SHALL return "True" if any of the XML > nodes in the node-set matched by the first argument equals any of the > XML nodes in the node-set matched by the second argument. Two nodes > are considered equal if they have the same identity.” > > How is identity defined? > In general, the XACML TC are a bunch of lazy people who like to reference other specifications so we can reuse the results of other people. ;-) For defining the xpath matching functions XACML 2.0 referred to a draft specification of XPath 2.0. XPath 2.0 finalized their spec during the course of XACML 3.0 development, so we updated our references to the final XPath 2.0 specification. However, the final XPath 2.0 specification did not contain the node equality function which XACML 2.0 referred to. In this case I copied the text from the old XPath 2.0 working draft into the XACML 3.0 specification. So "... if they have the same identity" comes from a draft spec of XPath 2.0. I could not find anything better so I left it unchanged by copying in the text. > Further you asked in your mail what I want to test at each node. Well > that depends on the needed access control semantics. For example you > could > > 1: permit access to a certain book node if > Selector(resource-id+/author) = subject-id > > 2: deny access to a certain book node if > (Selector(resource-id+/author) != subject-id) AND > (Selector(resource-id+/price>100) > > or > > 3: deny access to the book-content element of a certain book if > ((Selector(resource-id+/author) != subject-id) AND > (Selector(resource-id+/price)>100) > > … > > I hope that the examples show that the combination of individual > resource-id values and the use of these values as base in the > selectors Requestcontext path allows for very flexible access semantics. > > Further having decisions to each individual node allows to filter out > the individual nodes. > > e.g. if only book No. 12345 is access restricted because of rule 2 > than your pep can use the resource-id value in the decision response > and through a simple xslt the only access restricted book node can be > filtered out. > > You were further asking if I can’t use schema based restrictions. As > the examples above motivate this is not possible as we mainly have > content dependant restrictions. > > As we use xacml to protect web services performance is critical. Of > course the example was huge but not unrealistic. > > Of course you could do the access control on the web-service-request. > E,g, assume > > you had the following web-service-request that resulted in the set of > 1M books: > > <select> > > <colums>title, author, id, price, book-content</colums> > > <from> book </from> > > <where> id< 1,000,000 </where> > > </select> > > Enforcing the rights above while doing pre-processing access control > (ie. access control on the web-service-request) implies that you have > rules e.g. > > <rule> > > <target> > > string-regexp-match(resource-id, /select\[\d+\]/) > > or the xpath-node-match alternative and than > > <condition> > > selector(resource-id+/from) = “book” > > <obligation> > > add to <where>: and (price>100 and author= > “AttributeDesignator(subject-id)” > > … > > I added this just to show that access control on the ws request works > with the same techniques as on the ws-response. > > Note that pre-processing still doesn’t solve the performance issue. > > e.g. assume a user is inserting 1000 book elements and each has 30 > attributes and the book-content included. so even while pre-processing > ac performance matters. > > While answering your questions I drifted away from the actual topic. > Sorry about that but I thought some further insides in our use cases > might help. Let’s return to the he original question: is the > string-regexp-match function a reasonable alternative to using the > xpath-node-equal function when evaluating resource.id values? > > regards > > jan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Von:* Tyson, Paul H [mailto:PTyson@bellhelicopter.textron.com] > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2009 19:55 > *An:* Jan Herrmann; email@example.com > *Betreff:* RE: [xacml] string-regexp-match function on individual > resource-id values as an alternative to the xpath-node-equal/match > function? > > If you really want 12M Result elements, the PDP is going to have to do > something 12M times. If it's not very well optimized, it's likely to > do things 12M x n times. > > Assume it's highly optimized so it just walks DOM once. At each node > it will: > > 1. Generate a resource-id for that node > > 2. Apply rule(s) on that resource-id (or node). Either > > a. apply regexp match; OR > > b. apply some xpath expression > > 3. Put a Result element in the response context > > I'm not sure what you want to test at each node, but with regexp all > you do is test the position and ancestors of each node. This would be > problematic (and probably expensive) to do with current XACML xpath > capabilities. But if AttributeSelector allowed you to set xpath > evaluation context at the decision node, it would be a simple matter > to test position and ancestor list (or any other information from any > node in the document). I do not believe a regexp test gives much, if > any, advantage here. And, you must admit, this is an extreme use case > that would most likely occur in batch (non-interactive) mode, so > performance is less critical. > > Since you are not testing any content, maybe you really just want to > know something like "Can Jones see the titles of all books in the > catalog?", "Can Jones see the ids?", "Can Jones see the prices?". In > that case you could just identify the resource type (element name), > perhaps by using the fully qualified type name from the schema, like: > > resource-id=http://example.com/myBookSchema#book (or #title, #id, etc.) > > No XML content is required to answer this sort of request. > > Regards, > > --Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Jan Herrmann [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:39 > *To:* email@example.com > *Subject:* [xacml] string-regexp-match function on individual > resource-id values as an alternative to the xpath-node-equal/match > function? > > Hi all, > > in order to identify isolated issues of the mult&hier resource > profile, I’d like to raise this question (which I hope can be > addressed separately) > > Does it make sense to evaluate the individual resource-id > attribute values through the string-regexp-match function? > > The example below tries to motivate why the string-regexp-match > function could be a reasonable alternative to using the > xpath-node-equal function. > > Assume you have the following decision request with a resource > content element containing 1,000,000 book objects. > > <Request> > > … > > <Attributes > Category="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:attribute-category:resource"> > > <Content> > > <objects> > > <book id=1> > > <title>xxx</title> > > <author>Bob</author> > > <id>100</id> > > <price>30</price> > > <book-content>...</book-content> > > </book> > > <book id=2> > > … > > </book> > > …. > > <book id=1,000,000> > > … > > </book> > > </content> > > <Attribute > AttributeId="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:1.0:resource:resource-id" > > > <AttributeValue > XPathCategory="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:attribute-category:resource" > DataType=" > urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:data-type:xpathExpression">/objects</AttributeValue> > > </Attribute> > > <Attribute > AttributeId="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:2.0:resource:scope " > > > <AttributeValue > XPathCategory="urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:attribute-category:resource" > DataType="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"> Descendants > </AttributeValue> > > </Attribute> > > </Attributes> > > … > > </Request> > > As one of this simple book elements consists of 12 nodes, you will > get 12 individual decision requests for each book. > > Having 1,000,000 book elements will result in 12,000,000 > individual decision requests. > > Having a rule like permit access to book nodes will imply > 12,000,000 evaluations of the function checking the individual > resource-id attributes. > > e.g. if you use the xpath-node-equal function… > > xpath-node-equal(/objects, /Objects/book) > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book, /Objects/book) > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book/@id, /Objects/book) > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book/title, /Objects/book) > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book/title/text(), /Objects/book) > > … > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book, /Objects/book) > > … > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book, /Objects/book) > > … > > xpath-node-equal(/objects/book[1,000,000], /Objects/book) > > The question now is whether it is faster to use the > > a) xpath-node-equal function or the > > b) string-regexp-match function > > against the resource-id values of the derived individual decision > requests. > > The evaluation of the xpath-node-equal function will imply the > evaluation of 12,000,001 xpath expressions against the large (e.g. > 2GB) DOM representing the content. > > The evaluation of the string-regexp-match function doesn’t need to > be evaluated against the xml resource. Further the regular > expression has a very specific structure (e.g. > reg-exp-string-match(resource-id,/objects\[\d+\]/book\[\d+\]) > > I am no expert in xpath evaluation algorithms but it seems to me > that reg-exp-match is the cheaper operation to do. > > I think a theoretical performance analysis between the > string-regexp-match function and an xpath evaluation algorithm is > the core issue we have to figure out. > > If string-regexp-match performs significantly better than we > should add this alternative to the profile. In this case we have > of course to agree on a normal-form for the individual resource-id > values and on standardised guidelines how to deal with the > namespace problem. > > Regards > > Jan > > ________________________________________ > > Jan Herrmann > Dipl.-Inform., Dipl.-Geogr. > > wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter > > Technische Universität München > Institut für Informatik > > Lehrstuhl für Angewandte Informatik / Kooperative Systeme > > Boltzmannstr. 3 > 85748 Garching > > Tel: +49 (0)89 289-18692 > Fax: +49 (0)89 289-18657 > > Raum: > www11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de > <outbind://8-00000000E95EB49608892D41BB762B4A0356A3FD844D2000/www11.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> > ________________________________________ >