Changes between Version 24 and Version 25 of Internal/Rbac/OrbitRbacDesign/ThreatAnalysis


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 20, 2006, 5:57:27 PM (18 years ago)
Author:
hedinger
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Internal/Rbac/OrbitRbacDesign/ThreatAnalysis

    v24 v25  
    2323 * intentional or unintentional modification or deletion of a user's or a project's scripts or own components or data results by nonproject members.
    2424 * unauthorized access to ORBIT system code, esp., device driver source or controller scripts.
    25 
     25http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/200404/msg00036.html
    2626Who (what role on the project) is allowed to change data, i.e., remove outliers, otherwise filter data, or delete data sets?
    2727
     
    3434Are there any requirements related to version control?  Is it safe to assume that each project will keep track of it?
    3535
    36 Although it does not seem likely with the current ORBIT resources, it is possible that access to some resources, e.g., special instruments, might be limited to protect them from overuse or damage or just to keep the in calibration.
     36Although it does not seem likely with the current ORBIT resources, it is possible that access to some resources, e.g., special instruments, might be limited to protect them from overuse or damage or just to keep the in calibration.http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/200404/msg00036.html
    3737
    3838Are there any other threats that might require the use of RBAC with ORBIT?
     
    4949
    5050It is assumed that access control will not need to interface with cost accounting.  It is assumed that any denial of access to overdrawn users will be enforced by user authentication.  If it is required to enforce project-level denial of access due to cost considerations it might be possible to enforce it when an already authorized user attempts to select that project or when he or she accesses an object with a cost associated with it.
     51http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xacml/200404/msg00036.html
     52
     53It is probably a good idea to maintain Unicode compatibility (UTF-8 encoding) with user and project names for international use.