期刊文献+

安全策略模型聚合性评估方法 被引量:4

Groupability in Security Policy Models
下载PDF
导出
摘要 动态策略支持与授权粒度是访问控制的关键问题.现有的研究只关注安全策略的描述能力,却忽略了对策略结构与授权粒度的分析,从而无法全面满足动态策略支持与最小授权要求.指出Lampson访问矩阵模型是对最细粒度访问控制的抽象,普通安全策略则根据应用安全需求对Lampson访问矩阵进行聚合.基于安全标签的聚合性描述框架(a descriptive framework of groupability basing on security labels,简称GroSeLa)可将普通安全策略映射为Lampson访问矩阵,该框架分为基本组件与扩展两部分:前者分析用于实现矩阵聚合的安全策略结构;后者则指出实现全面动态策略支持必须支持的7类管理性需求.在此基础上,提出5项聚合性指标:聚合因子、动态因子、策略规模、授权粒度与职责隔离支持.对4类经典安全策略ACL,BLP,DTE与RBAC的评估,是从矩阵聚合的角度分析不同的安全策略在表达性、可用性与授权粒度上的差异. Dynamic policy supporting and authorization granularity are two key issues in access control. Present researches only compared the expressiveness of policies, but never considered the policy's structure and the granularity of authorization, which makes it difficult to support the dynamic policy and satisfy the least privilege requirement. As this paper points out that Lampson's access matrix is the most fine-grained access control model, the other security policies need to group access matrix according to their different application requirements. By defining a descriptive framework of Groupability Basing on Security Labels (GroSeLa), generic security policies can be mapped into Lampson's access matrix. GroSeLa framework consists of a set of fundamental components and an extension. The fundamental components give all policy's structure for grouping matrix, and the extension reveals all necessary administrative requirements for supporting dynamic policy completely. Based on GroSeLa, this paper proposes five grouping dimensions for evaluating security policies, including grouping factors, dynamic factors, policy scale, authorization granularity and separation of duty supporting. The paper also compares four classic security policies, namely ACL (access control list), BLP (Bell LaPadula), DTE (domain and type enforcement) and RBAC (role-based access control). To the best of these knowledge, it is studied that the difference on expressiveness, usability and authorization granularity of different security policies are from the aspect of grouping access matrix.
出处 《软件学报》 EI CSCD 北大核心 2009年第7期1953-1966,共14页 Journal of Software
基金 国家自然科学基金No.60573042 国家重点基础研究发展计划(973)No.G1999035802 北京市自然科学基金No.4052016~~
关键词 聚合 安全标签 访问矩阵 动态策略 最小授权 group security label access matrix dynamic policy least privilege
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献46

  • 1[1]Curry, D. A., Improving the security of your UNIX system, Technology report ITSTD-721-FR-90-21, SRI International, April 1990.
  • 2[2]IBM server group, Addressing secrity issues in Linux, A Linux White Paper, 2000.
  • 3[3]Data General, Managing security on DG/UX system, manual 093-701138-04, Data General Corporation, Westboro, MA01580, Nov. 1996.
  • 4[4]Cowan, C., Beattie, S., Kroach-Hartman, G. et al., SubDomain: parsimonious server security, 14th USENIX Systems Administration Conference (LISA 2000), New Orleans, LA, December 2000.
  • 5[5]Chandramouli, R., A framework for multiple authorization types in a healthcare application system, in Proc.17th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, December 2001,137-148.
  • 6[6]Hoffman, J., Implementing RBAC on a type enforced system, In Proc. 13th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, December 1997, 158-163.
  • 7[7]Sandhu, R.S., Coyne, E. J., Feinstein, H. L. et al., Role based access control models, IEEE Computer, February 1996, 29(2): 38-47.
  • 8[8]Ferraiolo, D. F., Sandhu, R., Gavrila, S. et al., Proposed NIST standard for role-based access control, ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, August 2001, 4(3): 224-274.
  • 9[9]Dalton, C., Choo, T. H., An operating system approach to securing e-services, Communication of the ACM,2001, 44(2): 58-66.
  • 10[10]Baldwin, R. W., Naming and grouping privileges to simplify security management in large database, in Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 1990, 116-132.

共引文献32

同被引文献65

  • 1汪靖,林植,李云山.一种安全策略的冲突检测与消解方法[J].计算机应用,2009,29(3):823-825. 被引量:4
  • 2杨秋伟,洪帆,杨木祥,朱贤.基于角色访问控制管理模型的安全性分析[J].软件学报,2006,17(8):1804-1810. 被引量:38
  • 3郑秋生,白永红,夏冰.计算机网络安全评估技术的研究[C]//.计算机研究新进展(2009).北京:电子工业出版社,2009:26-30.
  • 4Peter Mell,Karen Scarfone,Sasha Romanosky. A Complete Guide to the Common Vulnerability Scoring System Version2. 0 [EB/OL]. (2009-- 04-- 08). http//www, first, org/cvss/cvss-guide, htm.
  • 5ISS X-Force Database. Microsoft Windows 2000 Brute Force Attack[EB/OL]. [2011- 03--01]. http://xforce, iss. net/xforce/xfdb/5585.
  • 6National Vulnerability Database. CVE-- 2000 -- 1217[EB/OL]. (2008 -- 09 -- 05) [2011 -- 03 -- 01]. http://web, nvd. hist. gov/view/vuln/detail? vulnId = CVE-- 2000 -- 1217.
  • 7US-CERT. Vulnerability Note VU # 818496 [EB/OL]. ( 2001 -- 04 -- 30) [ 2011 -- 03 -- 01 ]. http ://www. kb. cert. org/vuls/ id/818496.
  • 8Sandhu R, Coyne E J, Feinstein, et al. Role-based access control models[J]. IEE[Computer, 1996,29 (2) : 38-47.
  • 9Sandhu R, Bhamidipati V, Munawer Q. The ARBAC97 Model for Role-Based Administration of Roles[J]. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 1999,2(1) : 105-135.
  • 10Fereaiolo D F, Sandhu R, Gavrila S, et al. Proposed NIST Stan- dard for Role-Based Access Control[J]. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 2001,4(3) : 224-274.

引证文献4

二级引证文献25

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部