skip to main content
10.1145/2462410.2462414acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacmatConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An information flow control meta-model

Published:12 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper a meta-model for information flow control is defined using the foundation of Barker's access control meta-model. The purposes for defining this meta-model is to achieve a more principled understanding of information flow control, to compare information flow control and access control at an abstract level, and to explore how information flow control and access control might be composed to yield a rich new set of ideas and systems for controlling the dissemination of sensitive information. It is shown that it is possible to define a meta-model for information flow control, that such a model is more complex compared to the access control meta-model, and that the meta-models for information flow control and access control can be composed in a conceptually straightforward way.

References

  1. M. Bishop, Computer Security: Art and Science. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. W. Tolone, G.-J. Ahn, T. Pai, and S.-P. Hong, "Access control in collaborative systems," ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 37, pp. 29--41, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. F. Ferraiolo and D. Kuhn, "Role Based Access Control," 15th National Computer Security Conference, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. D. F. Ferraiolo, R. Sandhu, S. Gavrila, D. R. Kuhn, and R. Chandramouli, "Proposed NIST standard for Rel-Based Access Control," ACM Transactions on Information and Systems Security, vol. 4, pp. 224--274, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. R. K. Thomas, "Team-based access control (TMAC): a primitive for applying role-based access controls in collaborative environments," Proceedings of the Second ACM Workshop on Role-Based Access Control, Fairfax, Virginia, United States, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. R. K. Thomas and R. S. Sandhu, "Task-Based Authorization Controls (TBAC): A Family of Models for Active and Enterprise-Oriented Authorization Management," Proceedings of the IFIP TC11 WG11.3 Eleventh International Conference on Database Securty XI: Status and Prospects, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. S. Barker, M. J. Sergot, and D. Wijesekera, "Status-Based Access Control," ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur., vol. 12, pp. 1--47, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. E. Bertino, B. Catania, M. L. Damiani, and P. Perlasca, "GEO-RBAC: a spatially aware RBAC," Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Stockholm, Sweden, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S. M. Chandran and J. Joshi, "LoT-RBAC: A Location and Time-Based RBAC Model," Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE 2005), 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. K. Georgiadis, I. Mavridis, G. Pangalos, and R. K. Thomas, "Flexible team-based access control using contexts," Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Chantilly, Virginia, United States, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. H. Jafarian, and Amini, Morteza, "CAMAC: A Context-Aware Mandatory Access Control Model," ISeCure, The ISC International Journal of Information Security, vol. 1, pp. 35--54, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Q. Ni, D. Lin, E. Bertino, and J. Lobo, "Conditional Privacy-Aware Role Based Access Control," 12th European Symposiun on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS 2007), Dresden, Germany, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Q. Ni, A. Trombetta, E. Bertino, and J. Lobo, "Privacy-aware role based access control," Proceedings of the 12th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Sophia Antipolis, France, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Q. Ni, E. Bertino, and J. Lobo, "An obligation model bridging access control policies and privacy policies," Proceedings of the 13th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Estes Park, CO, USA, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. S. Barker, "The next 700 access control models or a unifying meta-model?," Proceedings of the 14th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Stresa, Italy, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. S. Barker, "Personalizing access control by generalizing access control," Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Zeldovich, S. Boyd-Wickizer, E. Kohler, and D. Mazieres, "Making information flow explicit in HiStar," Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation - Volume 7, Seattle, WA, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. D. E. Denning, "A lattice model of secure information flow," Communication of the ACM, vol. 19, pp. 236--243, 1976. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. W. Enck, P. Gilbert, B.-G. Chun, L. P. Cox, J. Jung, P. McDaniel, and A. N. Sheth, "TaintDroid: an information-flow tracking system for realtime privacy monitoring on smartphones," Proceedings of the 9th USENIX conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. K. Hyung Chan, A. D. Keromytis, M. Covington, and R. Sahita, "Capturing Information Flow with Concatenated Dynamic Taint Analysis," in International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES '09), 2009, pp. 355--362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. C. Myers, "JFlow: practical mostly-static information flow control," Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, San Antonio, Texas, United States, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. S. Vandebogart, P. Efstathopoulos, E. Kohler, M. Krohn, C. Frey, D. Ziegler, F. Kaashoek, R. Morris, and D. Mazieres, "Labels and event processes in the Asbestos operating system," ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 25, p. 11, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. N. Zeldovich, S. Boyd-Wickizer, and D. Mazieres, "Securing distributed systems with information flow control," Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. J. Park and R. Sandhu, "The UCONABC Usage Control Model," ACM Transactions on Information Systems Security, vol. 7, pp. 128--174, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. Ayed, N. Cuppens-Boulahia, and F. Cuppens, "An integrated model for access control and information flow requirements," Proceedings of the 12th Asian Computing Science Conference on Advances in Computer Science: Computer and Network Security, Doha, Qatar, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. V. Atluri, W.-K. Huang, and E. Bertino, "A semantic-based execution model for multilevel secure workflows," Journal on Computer Security, vol. 8, pp. 3--41, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. U.S. Department of Defense, "Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria ", 1985, pp. 116.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. E. Staab and G. Muller, "MITRA: A Meta-Model for Information Flow in Trust and Reputation Architectures," Computing Research Repository (CoRR), vol. abs/1207.0405, 2012 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. A. Sabelfeld and A. C. Myers, "Language-based information-flow security," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 21, pp. 5--19, January 2003 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. A. C. Myers and B. Liskov, "Protecting privacy using the decentralized label model," ACM Transactions on Software Engingeering Methodology, vol. 9, pp. 410--442, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. P. Efstathopoulos, M. Krohn, S. VanDeBogart, C. Frey, D. Ziegler, E. Kohler, D. Mazieres, F. Kaashoek, and R. Morris, "Labels and event processes in the asbestos operating system," Proceedings of the twentieth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, Brighton, United Kingdom, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. I. Roy, D. E. Porter, M. D. Bond, K. S. McKinley, and E. Witchel, "Laminar: practical fine-grained decentralized information flow control," Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Dublin, Ireland, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. R. Wu, G.-J. Ahn, H. Hu, and M. Singhal, "Information Flow Control in Cloud Computing," The Fifth International Workshop on Trusted Collaboration (TrustCol 2010), Chicago, IL, USA, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. N. Broberg and D. Sands, "Paralocks: role-based information flow control and beyond," Proceedings of the 37th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Madrid, Spain, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An information flow control meta-model

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SACMAT '13: Proceedings of the 18th ACM symposium on Access control models and technologies
          June 2013
          278 pages
          ISBN:9781450319508
          DOI:10.1145/2462410

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 June 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          SACMAT '13 Paper Acceptance Rate19of62submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate177of597submissions,30%

          Upcoming Conference

          SACMAT 2024

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader