The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Design of a role-based trust-management framework
Abstract
We introduce the RT framework, a family of role-based trust management languages for representing policies and credentials in distributed authorization. RT combines the strengths of role-based access control and trust-management systems and is especially suitable for attribute-based access control. Using a few simple credential forms, RT provides localized authority over roles, delegation in role definition, linked roles, and parameterized roles. RT also introduces manifold roles, which can be used to express threshold and separation-of-duty policies, and delegation of role activations. We formally define the semantics of credentials in the RT framework by presenting a translation from credentials to Datalog rules. This translation also shows that this semantics is algorithmically tractable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Design and implementation of the idemix anonymous credential system
Camenisch, J., & Van Herreweghen, E. (2002) · Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and communications security · doi:10.1145/586110.586114 · Cited by 555
Delegation logic: A logic-based approach to distributed authorization
Li, N., Grosof, B. N., & Feigenbaum, J. (2003) · ACM Transactions on Information and System Security · doi:10.1145/605434.605438 · Cited by 425
Self-citationSTORK: a real, heterogeneous, large-scale eID management system
Ribeiro, C., Leitold, H., Esposito, S., & Mitzam, D. (2018) · International Journal of Information Security · doi:10.1007/s10207-017-0385-x · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, N., Mitchell, J. C., & Winsborough, W. H.
- Venue
- Proceedings 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
- Publisher
- IEEE Comput. Soc
- Published
- 2005-08-24
- Pages
- 114-130
- ISSN
- 1081-6011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2123479684
- Cited by
- 750
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 176.13
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
