Hi Rushmin,
I sent the above reply having the impression like that the XACML policy
'yes' / 'no' option is mapped with the resource..
But since its mapped to Policy Group +1 for the change...

Thanks..

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Lahiru Cooray <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Rushmin,
>
> *Regarding XACML Policy assigning change.*
>
> Policy Groups were initially introduced to centralise the policy
> combinations, where we can assign all the required policies and wrap the
> combination as a policy group.
> So we do not need to set policies(User Roles, Allow Anonymous, XAML
> policies , etc) against each resource,instead we can map only the policy
> group.
>
> Here what you have mentioned is technically correct. We do not need the
> link between Policy Group and XACML Policies.
>
> But if we think end user's perspective, I think the XACML policies are
> also should be included to the policy group.
> Because for the end user, this is just another policy type.
> So why does he need to create a policy group with all other policy
> combinations and again assign the XACML policies separately?
>
>
> i'll vote '0' for the XACML Policy assigning change..
>
> Thanks..
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Rushmin Fernando <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> We are planning to change the existing XACML based authorization
>> implementation.
>>
>> In the current implementation the XACML policies are generated by
>> aggregating the following parts.
>>
>> 1) Target -> Resource-Id (Determined by the URL of a resource)
>> 2) Target -> Action-Id (Determined by the HTTP verb of a resources)
>> 3) Condition (App creator can author the condition element which whatever
>> logic he needs)
>>
>> In the new implementation the policy generation part will be gone and the
>> users should create policies using the carbon console.
>>
>> The main purpose of generating the policies from APPM side was to prevent
>> a user who owns one app, from writing a XACML policy which might affect
>> another app.
>>
>> Because it was APPM who generated the resource-id (relative URL of the
>> resource) in the target of the policy. So that the users had no control
>> over the resource-id hence there was no possibility for a creator of one
>> app to mention a resource id of another app.
>>
>> So we should think of a way of enforcing this restriction, in the new
>> implementation as well. (May be asking the policy creators to prefix the
>> resource ids with the app UUID)That's one concern.
>>
>> And the other concern is, in the new implementation, the plan is to show
>> the user, the policies list which were created using the Carbon console,
>> when the user is going to create a policy group. So that the user can pick
>> the policies and add them to the policy group. In other words we are going
>> to maintain a mapping between the XACML policies refs and the APPM policy
>> groups.
>>
>> But why ?
>>
>> When a request comes to the gateway we simply send a XACML request which
>> contains the resource id (the http request url) and the action id (http
>> verb). And the XACML engine would go through ALL the XACML policies to find
>> out a policy which would match the given request.
>>
>> So there is not point of maintaining a mapping between the XACML policies
>> and policy groups. Because its the XACML policy's 'target' sections which
>> determine which policy should get engaged to a XACML request, not the
>> mapping we are going to maintain from the APPM side.
>>
>> Therefore without do a mapping, shouldn't it be a simple option to say
>> 'yes' or 'no' to XACML policy evaluation for a given APPM policy group
>>
>> Thoughts please ?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Rushmin
>>
>> --
>> *Rushmin Fernando*
>> *Technical Lead*
>>
>> WSO2 Inc. <http://wso2.com/> - Lean . Enterprise . Middleware
>>
>> email : [email protected]
>> mobile : +94772310855
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Lahiru Cooray*
> Software Engineer
> WSO2, Inc.;http://wso2.com/
> lean.enterprise.middleware
>
> Mobile: +94 715 654154
>



-- 
*Lahiru Cooray*
Software Engineer
WSO2, Inc.;http://wso2.com/
lean.enterprise.middleware

Mobile: +94 715 654154
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to