Trusted Computing Models
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 14

Trusted Computing Models Prof. Ravi Sandhu Executive Director and Endowed Chair PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 110 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Trusted Computing Models Prof. Ravi Sandhu Executive Director and Endowed Chair Institute for Cyber Security University of Texas at San Antonio June 2008 [email protected] www.profsandhu.com. Change Drivers. Stand-alone computers. Internet. Vandals.

Download Presentation

Trusted Computing Models Prof. Ravi Sandhu Executive Director and Endowed Chair

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Trusted Computing Models

Prof. Ravi Sandhu

Executive Director and Endowed Chair

Institute for Cyber Security

University of Texas at San Antonio

June 2008

[email protected]

www.profsandhu.com


Change Drivers

Stand-alone computers

Internet

Vandals

Criminals, Nation states, Terrorists

Mutually suspicious yet mutually dependent security

Enterprise security

Many and new

innovative services

Few standard services


Basic Assumptions (Axioms)

  • Information needs to be protected

    • In motion

    • At rest

    • In use

  • Absolute security is impossible and unnecessary

    • Trying to approximate absolute security is a bad strategy

    • “Good enough” security is feasible and meaningful

  • Security is meaningless without application context

    • Cannot know we have “good enough” without this context

  • Models and abstractions are all important

    • Without a conceptual framework it is hard to separate “what needs to be done” from “how we do it”

We are not very good at doing any of this


PEI Models: 3 Layers/5 Layers


Access Control Models

  • Discretionary Access Control (DAC)

    • Owner controls access but only to the original, not to copies

  • Mandatory Access Control (MAC)

    • Access based on security labels

    • Labels propagate to copies

  • Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)

    • Access based on roles

    • Can be configured to do DAC or MAC

  • Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC)

    • Access based on attributes, to possibly include roles, security labels and whatever


Usage Control Model (UCON)

  • unified model integrating

    • authorization

    • obligation

    • conditions

  • and incorporating

    • continuity of decisions

    • mutability of attributes


What makes UCON different?

  • UCON is an attribute-based authorization model

    BUT

  • Attributes are mutable, in that the system updates them automatically as a result of usage

    • Allows count-limited, rate-limited, quota-limited policies to be expressed and enforced

    • E.g., can access upto 10 documents per hour

  • Access may require explicit actions by the user attempting access, other users or the system

    • Enables human-in-the-loop just-in-time decisions

    • E.g., access requires confirmation by a superior officer

    • Enables notification of access

    • E.g., access is notified to a designated audit authority

    • Enables clean-up after access is completed

    • E.g., delete cryptographic keys, plaintext content

  • Access can depend on system condition and mode

    • E.g., in emergency mode access is enabled (or disabled)

  • Access mediation can continue while access is in progress

    • E.g., if credentials are revoked access is immediately terminated

    • E.g., if system mode changes from normal to emergency access is terminated


PEI Models: 3 Layers/5 Layers


Policy Model

  • Access to current documents only (or)

  • Access to current documents and past documents

  • Access can be further restricted with rate and/or usage limits

  • Access can be further restricted on basis of individual user credentials

  • Past member loses access to all documents (or)

  • can access any document created during his membership (or)

  • can access documents he accessed during membership (or)

  • can access all documents created before he left the group (this includes the ones created before his join time)

  • all subject to possible additional rate, usage and user credential restrictions

  • No rejoin of past members is allowed, rejoin with new ID (or)

  • Past members rejoin the group just like any other user who has never been a member

  • The same access policies defined during his prior membership should again be enforced (or)

  • access policies could vary between membership cycles

  • Straight-forward. User has no access to any group documents.

enroll

Initial state:

Never been a member

State I

Currently a member

State II

Past member

State III

enroll

dis-enroll


Policy Model

  • Cannot be re-added.

  • When a document is re-added, it will be treated as a new document that is added into the group.

  • Only current members can access.

  • Past members and current members can access

  • No one can access

  • Any one can access

  • Past members can access

  • Straight-forward. No access to group members.

  • Access allowed only to current group members

  • Access allowed to current and past group members

add

Initial state:

Never been a group doc

State I

Currently a group doc

State II

Past group doc

State III

add

remove


Enforcement Model

Control Center (CC)

  • Two sets of attributes

  • Authoritative: as known to the CC

  • Local: as known on a member’s computer

4

2

3

5

7

1

  • Member enroll and dis-enroll (steps 1-2, 5)

  • Document add and remove (step 6, 7)

  • Read policy enforcement (step 3)

  • Attribute update (step 4)

Joining Member

Group-Admin

Member

6

D-Member

Ideal Model: steps 3 and 4 are coupled

Approximate Model: steps 3 and 4 are de-coupled


Implementation Model

  • Use TC mechanisms to bind group key + attributes to TRM


Trusted Computing Technology

  • Need crypto and access control

  • Requirements

    • Hide the root keys

    • Authorize use of root keys

      • Wrt software

      • Wrt people

    • Curtained memory

    • Remote attestation

    • Translation of policy

      • E.g., Policy in XACML to policy in SELinux


Conclusion

  • Some very interesting challenges ahead and some very exciting research to be done

  • Requires collaboration between

    • Domain experts

    • Technology experts

    • Security experts


  • Login