1. 1 Nov. 2, 2005 Design and Application of Rule Based Access Control Policies Huiying Li, Xiang Zhang, Honghan Wu & Yuzhong Qu xzhang@seu.edu.cn Dept. Computer Science & Engineering Southeast University, China

2. 2 Nov. 2, 2005 Outline  Our Idea  Semantic Web Rule Language  Model Design  Use Cases  Conclusion and Future Work

3. 3 Nov. 2, 2005 Our Idea  Requirements of WonderSpace  Express access control policies with powerful expressive ability.  Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL)  A Horn clause rules extension to OWL proposed in 2004.

4. 4 Nov. 2, 2005 What is the Idea  Express access control policies based on OWL and SWRL  OWL: ontology  SWRL: rule  Friend of a Friend (FOAF)  Information about people

5. 5 Nov. 2, 2005 Semantic Web Rule Language  SWRL extends OWL DL by adding a simple form of Horn-style rules for the purpose of enhancing expressive ability  The form of a rule  antecedent  consequent.

6. 6 Nov. 2, 2005 Semantic Web Rule Language  The antecedent and consequent of a rule consist of zero or more atoms.  Atoms can be the form of C(x), P(x, y), Q(x, z), sameAs(x, y) or differentFrom(x, y)  An typical example:  parent(?a, ?b)  brother(?b, ?c)  uncle(?a, ?c). It is true in China…

7. 7 Nov. 2, 2005 Model Design - Ontology  Assertion about what kinds of agents are permitted/prohibited to access to what kinds of resources

8. 8 Nov. 2, 2005 Model Design - Ontology

9. 9 Nov. 2, 2005 Model Design - Ontology

10. 10 Nov. 2, 2005 Model Design - Rule  Give more explicit meaning to properties  member(?z, ?x)  member(?z, ?y)  Person(?x)  Person(?y)  sameGroupOf(?x, ?y)

11. 11 Nov. 2, 2005 Model Design - Rule  Express access control policies  member(wonderspace, ?x)  isPermittedtoRead(?x, somePaper)

12. 12 Nov. 2, 2005 Use Case  Jack published a note about a project plan and asserted that the members of WonderSpace group could read this plan, while the members of his group could edit it online.  member(?z, ?x)  member(?z, ?y)  Person(?x)  Person(?y)  sameGroupOf(?x, ?y)  memberOf(?x,WonderSpace)  isPermittedtoRead (?x, plan),  sameGroupOf(?y, Jack)  isPermittedtoEdit(?y, plan).

13. 13 Nov. 2, 2005 Conclusion and Future Work  Prove Our Concept: OWL + SWRL for Access Control Policy  Policy Confliction  Policy Enforcement  Trustworthy of the information source  Operational semantics of the policy language.

14. 14 Nov. 2, 2005 Main References  I. Horrocks, P. F. Patel-Schneider, H. Boley, S. Tabet, B. Grosof, and M. Dean: SWRL: A semantic web rule language combining owl and ruleml. W3C Member Submission, 21 May 2004.  J. M. Bradshaw, S. Dutfield, P. Benoit, and J. D. Woolley:KAoS: Toward An Industrial-Strength Open Agent Architecture. Software Agents, J.M. Bradshaw (ed.), AAAI Press (1997) 375-418  L. Kagal, T. Finin, and A. Joshi: A policy language for a pervasive computing environment. IEEE 4th International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (2003).  P.F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, I. Horrocks (eds.): OWL: Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax. W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004.  P. Hayes (ed.): RDF Semantics. W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004.

15. 15 Nov. 2, 2005 Thank you !