Advertisement

Component-Based Security Policy Design with Colored Petri Nets

  • Hejiao Huang
  • Hélène Kirchner
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5700)

Abstract

Security policies are one of the most fundamental elements of computer security. This paper uses colored Petri net process (CPNP) to specify and verify security policies in a modular way. It defines fundamental policy properties, i.e., completeness, termination, consistency and confluence, in Petri net terminology and gets some theoretical results. According to XACML combiners and property-preserving Petri net process algebra (PPPA), several policy composition operators are specified and property-preserving results are stated for the policy correctness verification.

Keywords

security policy colored Petri net specification and verification property-preservation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Astesiano, E., Bidoit, M., Kirchner, H., Krieg-Brückner, B., Mosses, P.D., Sannella, D., Tarlecki, A.: Casl: the common algebraic specification language. Theor. Comput. Sci. 286(2), 153–196 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barker, S., Fernández, M.: Term rewriting for access control. In: DBSec, pp. 179–193 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauer, L., Ligatti, J., Walker, D.: Composing security policies with polymer. In: PLDI, pp. 305–314 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bell, D., LaPadula, L.: Secure computer systems: A mathematical model. Journal of Computer Security ii. 4(2/3), 229–263 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bertino, E., Bettini, C., Ferrari, E., Samarati, P.: An access control model supporting periodicity constraints and temporal reasoning. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 23(3), 231–285 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertolissi, C., Fernández, M.: An algebraic-functional framework for distributed access control. In: International Conference on Risks and Security of Internet and Systems (CRISIS 2008), Tozeur, Tunisia. Proceedings IEEE Xplorer to appear (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bertolissi, C., Fernández, M.: A rewriting framework for the composition of access control policies. In: Proceedings of PPDP 2008, Valencia. ACM Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biba, K.: Integrity considerations for secure computer systems. Technical Report TR-3153, Mitre, Bedford, MA (1975)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonatti, P., De Capitani di Vimercati, S., Samarati, P.: An algebra for composing access control policies. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 5(1), 1–35 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonatti, P., Olmedilla, D.: Driving and monitoring provisional trust negotiation with metapolicies. In: Proceedings IEEE International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY). IEEE Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bonatti, P., Samarati, P.: A uniform framework for regulating service access and information release on the web. Journal of Computer Security 10(3), 241–272 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brewer, D.F.C., Nash, M.J.: The chinese wall security policy. In: Proc. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 206–214 (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruns, G., Dantas, D., Huth, M.: A simple and expressive semantic framework for policy composition in access control. In: FMSE 2007: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM workshop on Formal methods in security engineering, pp. 12–21. ACM Press, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruns, G., Huth, M.: Access-control policies via belnap logic: Effective and efficient composition and analysis. In: 21st IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF), pp. 163–176. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Campbell, R., Al-Muhtadi, J., Naldurg, P., Sampemane, G., Mickunas, M.D.: Towards security and privacy for pervasive computing. In: Okada, M., Pierce, B.C., Scedrov, A., Tokuda, H., Yonezawa, A. (eds.) ISSS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2609, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cholvy, L., Cuppens, F.: Analyzing consistency of security policies. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 103–112 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Choppy, C., Petrucci, L.: Towards a methodology for modeling with Petri nets. In: Proc. Workshop on Practical Use of Coloured Petri Nets (CPN 2004), pp. 39–56 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cirstea, H., Moreau, P., Santana de Oliveira, A.: Rewrite based specification of access control policies. In: Dougherty, D., Escobar, S. (eds.) Security and Rewriting Techniques, 3rd International Workshop SecRet 2008. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cuppens, F., Cuppens-Boulahia, N., Sans, T.: A security model with non-atomic actions and deadlines. In: CSFW, pp. 186–196. IEEE Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    de Oliveira, A.S., Wang, E.K., Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H.: Weaving rewrite-based access control policies. In: FMSE 2007: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM workshop on Formal methods in security engineering. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deng, Y., Wang, J.C., Tsai, J., Beznosov, K.: An approach for modeling and analysis of security system architectures. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 15(5), 1099–1119 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dougherty, D.J., Fisler, K., Krishnamurthi, S.: Specifying and reasoning about dynamic access-control policies. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4130, pp. 632–646. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dougherty, D.J., Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H., Santana de Oliveira, A.: Modular access control via strategic rewriting. In: Biskup, J., López, J. (eds.) ESORICS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4734, pp. 578–593. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Habib, L., Jaume, M., Morisset, C.: A formal comparison of the bell & lapadula and rbac models. In: Fourth International Symposium on Information Assurance and Security (IAS 2008), pp. 3–8. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Halpern, J.Y., Weissman, V.: Using first-order logic to reason about policies. In: CSFW, pp. 187–201 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Harrison, M.A., Ruzzo, W.L., Ullman, J.D.: Protection in operating systems. Commun. ACM 19(8), 461–471 (1976)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Huang, H.J.: Enhancing the Property-Preserving Petri Net Process Algebra for Component-based System Design (with Application to Designing Multi-agent Systems and Manufacturing Systems). PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, City University of Hong Kong (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huang, H.J., Kirchner, H.: Modular security policy design based on extended Petri nets. Technical Report inria-00396924, INRIA (2009), http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00396924/fr/
  29. 29.
    Jajodia, S., Samarati, P., Sapino, M.L., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Flexible support for multiple access control policies. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 26(2), 214–260 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jarvis, B., Jain, L.: Trust in LORA: Towards a formal definition of trust in BDI agents. In: Gabrys, B., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4252, pp. 458–463. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jaume, M., Morisset, C.: Towards a formal specification of access control. In: Degano, P., Kusters, R., Vigano, L., Zdancewic, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Joint Workshop on Foundations of Computer Security and Automated Reasoning for Security Protocol Analysis FCS-ARSPA 2006, pp. 213–232 (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jensen, K.: Coloured Petri Nets: Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use, vol. 1. Springer, Berlin (1997)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Juszczyszyn, K.: Verifying enterprise’s mandatory access control policies with coloured Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kalam, A., Baida, R., Balbiani, P., Benferhat, S., Cuppens, F., Deswarte, Y., Miege, A., Saurel, C., Trouessin, G.: Organization based access control. In: Proceedings IEEE 4th International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY), pp. 120–131. IEEE Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kirchner, C., Kirchner, H., Santana de Oliveira, A.: Analysis of rewrite-based access control policies. In: Dougherty, D., Escobar, S. (eds.) Security and Rewriting Techniques, 3rd International Workshop Secret 2008, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Knorr, K.: Dynamic access control through Petri net workflows. In: Proceedings of 16th Annual Conference on Computer Security Applications, pp. 159–167 (2000)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leahu, I., Tiplea, F.: The confluence property for Petri nets and its applications. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (2006)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lee, A.J., Boyer, J.P., Olson, L., Gunter, C.A.: Defeasible security policy composition for web services. In: Winslett, M., Gordon, A.D., Sands, D. (eds.) FMSE, pp. 45–54. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Li, N., Mitchell, J.C.: Datalog with constraints: A foundation for trust management languages. In: PADL, pp. 58–73 (2003)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mak, W.: Verifying Property Preservation for Component-based Software Systems (A Petri-net Based Methodology). PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, City University of Hong Kong (2001)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mortensen, K.: Automatic code generation method based on coloured Petri net models applied on an access control system. In: Nielsen, M., Simpson, D. (eds.) ICATPN 2000. LNCS, vol. 1825, pp. 367–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Moses, T.: Extensible access control markup language (XACML) version 2.0. Technical report, OASIS (February 2005)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mosses, P.D.: Component-based description of programming languages. In: Visions of Computer Science, Electronic Proceedings, pp. 275–286. BCS (2008)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Murata, T.: Petri nets: Properties, analysis, and applications. Proceedings of IEEE 77(4), 541–580 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Santana de Oliveira, A.: Réécriture et modularité pour les politiques de sécurité. PhD thesis, UHP Nancy 1 (2008)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shafiq, B., Masood, A., Joshi, J., Ghafoor, A.: A role-based access control policy verification framework for real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shandu, R., Coyne, E., Feinstein, H., Youman, C.: Role-based access control models. IEEE Computer 29(2), 38–47 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Stehr, M.-O., Meseguer, J., Olveczky, P.C.: Rewriting logic as a unifying framework for Petri nets. In: Ehrig, H., Juhás, G., Padberg, J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 2001. LNCS, vol. 2128, pp. 250–303. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tiplea, F., Jucan, T., Masalagiu, C.: Term rewriting systems and Petri nets. Analele Stiintifice ale Universitatii Al. I. Cuza 34(4), 305–317 (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tschantz, M.C., Krishnamurthi, S.: Towards reasonability properties for access-control policy languages. In: Ferraiolo, D.F., Ray, I. (eds.) SACMAT, pp. 160–169. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Verma, R., Rusinowitch, M., Lugiez, D.: Algorithms and reductions for rewriting problems. Fundamental Informatics 46(3), 257–276 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wijesekera, D., Jajodia, S.: A propositional policy algebra for access control. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 6(2), 286–325 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zhang, Z., Hong, F., Liao, J.: Modeling chinese wall policy using colored Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (2006)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zhang, Z., Hong, F., Xiao, H.: Verification of strict integrity policy via Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Systems and Networks Communication (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hejiao Huang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hélène Kirchner
    • 2
  1. 1.Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen Graduate SchoolChina
  2. 2.INRIA Bordeaux Sud-OuestFrance

Personalised recommendations