2011
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-19751-2_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semi-automatic Synthesis of Security Policies by Invariant-Guided Abduction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are three main lines of research that are related to our work. First, several logic-based frameworks (e.g., [19,14,7,15,1,24]) have been proposed to specify and analyze authorization policies with conditions depending on the environment of the system in which they are enforced. In principle, it is possible to consider the conditions depending on the execution of human activities as part of the environment and then re-use the available specification and analysis techniques.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There are three main lines of research that are related to our work. First, several logic-based frameworks (e.g., [19,14,7,15,1,24]) have been proposed to specify and analyze authorization policies with conditions depending on the environment of the system in which they are enforced. In principle, it is possible to consider the conditions depending on the execution of human activities as part of the environment and then re-use the available specification and analysis techniques.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We avoid this state-explosion problem by considering scenario-based specifications that allow one to focus on a small sub-set of the possible sequences of events, as explained in Section 5. It would be interesting to adapt the abduction techniques in [6,15] to identify which non-mechanizable facts need to be generated for the executability of complex scenarios in which condition (COMP2), about the "monotonicity" of the events (Section 5), does not hold.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%