Packet: a privacy-aware access control policy composition method for services composition in cloud environments

Abstract

Combining different independent cloud services must coordinate their access control policies. Otherwise unauthorized access to composite cloud service can occur when there’s a conflict among different cloud service providers’ access control policies, and then it will bring serious data security and privacy issues. In this paper, we propose Packet, a novel access control policy composition method that can detect and resolve policy conflicts in cloud service composition, including those conflicts related to privacyaware purposes and conditions. The Packet method is divided into four steps. First, employing a unified description, heterogeneous policies are transformed into a unified attributebased format. Second, to improve the conflict detection efficiency, policy conflicts on the same resource can be eliminated by adopting cosine similarity-based algorithm. Third, exploiting a hierarchical structure approach, policy conflicts related to different resources or privacy-aware purposes and conditions can be detected. Fourth, different conflict resolution techniques are presented based on the corresponding conflict types. We have successfully implemented the Packet method in Openstack platform. Comprehensive experiments have been conducted, which demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method by the comparison with the existing XACML-based system at conflict detection and resolution performance.

Keywords

cloud service composition / access control / privacy / policy composition / unified policy format / conflict detection / similarity analysis / conflict resolution

References

[1] Breiter G, Naik V K. A framework for controlling and managing hybrid cloud service integration. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering. 2013, 217–224

[2] Bonatti P, De Capitani di Vimercati S, Samarati P. An algebra for composing access control policies. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 2002, 5(1): 1–35

[3] Lin L, Huai J P, Li X X. Attribute-based access control policies composition algebra. Journal of Software, 2009, 20(2): 403–414

[4] Wijesekera D, Jajodia S. A propositional policy algebra for access control. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 2003, 6(2): 286–325

[5] Shu C C, Yang E Y, Arenas A E. Detecting conflicts in ABAC policies with rule-reduction and binary-search techniques. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks. 2009, 182–185

[6] Liu J, Zhang H Q, Dai X D, Wang Y G. A static ABAC policy conflict resolution algorithm. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Multimedia Information Networking and Security. 2012, 83–86

[7] Zou J S, Zhang Y S. Research of policy conflict detection and resolution in ABAC. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 2014, 10(12): 5237–5244

[8] Yan D F, Huang J L, Tian Y, Zhao Y, Yang F C. Policy conflict detection in composite web services with RBAC. In: Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Web Services. 2014, 534–541

[9] Yan D F, Tian Y. Privacy policy composition of privacy-aware RBAC model for composite web services. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Broadband Network and Multimedia Technology. 2013, 312–316

[10] Kabir M E, Wang H. Conditional purpose based access control model for privacy protection. In: Proceedings of Australasian Database Conference. 2009, 135–142

[11] Begum B A, Thakur R K, Patra P K. Security policy integration and conflict reconciliation for data integration across data sharing services in ubiquitous computing environments. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communication Technology. 2010, 1–6

[12] Yuan E, Tong J. Attributed based access control for web services. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Web Service. 2005, 561–569

[13] Ahn G J, Hu H X, Lee J, Meng Y S. Representing and reasoning about Web access control policies. In: Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Software and Applications. 2012, 137–146

[14] Bryans J. Reasoning about XACML policies using CSP. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Secure Web Services. 2005, 28–35

[15] Hughes G, Bultan T. Automated verification of access control policies. Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 2008, 6(10): 503–520

[16] Fisler K, Krishnamurthi S, Meyerovich L A, Tschantz M C. Verification and change-impact analysis of access control policies. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2005, 196–205

[17] Kolovski V, Hendler J, Parsia B. Analyzing web access ontrol policies. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web. 2007, 677–686

[18] Mazzoleni P, Crispo B, Sivasubramanian S, Bertino E. XACML policy integration algorithms. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 2008, 11(1): 1–23

[19] Rath A, Colin J N. Modeling and expressing purpose validation policy for privacy-aware usage control in distributed environment. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication. 2014, 104–111

[20] Madylova A, Oguducu S G. A taxonomy based semantic similarity of documents using the cosine measure. In: Proceeding of International Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences. 2009, 129–134

[21] Fan B B, Liang X Y, Luo Y, Bo Y, Xia C H. Conflict detection model of access control policy in collaborative environment. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computational and Information sciences. 2011, 377–381

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2016 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg