POLICY MEETING
September 9, 1999
3085 ENG II
2:00-3:00pm
In attendance:
Karl Levitt (KL), Michael Gertz (MG) and Premkumar Devanbu (PD)
- BAA 99-33 Proposal
- Using CYC for language to do reasoning and to translate to theorem provers - HOL, PBS
- CYC - expressive, huge knowledge base, organized
- Learning curve with CYC
- PD: Soundness of resolution, heuristic inferences, probabilistic extension
- KL: Trying to team with DeSanto; will use CYC as a backup if DeSanto doesn't join the proposal.
- Inconsistent theories are possible, but microtheories must be consistent
- PD: Does CYC support ontology exchange?
- Use some weak logic (CYCL) as an exchange language for policies
- PD: UML - building a security ontology server
- Band logic - formalize authentication
- Lightweight ontology - statically check if they're compatible
- Goals
- MG: Description/Frame Logic
- Don't want to do reasoning at a lower level
- Specify your systems, policies, mapping, projection rules
- Two policies may not be compatible - must be able to prove that two policies have no conflicts
- Projection is an important goal
- Ways to deny users to the system
- Block connection
- System cost/optimization
- What level o f abstraction for reasoning?
- Conceptual vs. instance representation
- VDM model - abstract at lower level - representation of objects - rules at next level
- MG Develop criteria for soundness and completeness
- Include existing work
- Enforcement Mechanisms
- Configure a mechanism on a lower level
- Cost model - best enforcement mechanism
- Cost of policy enforcement
- Cost to do filtering services
- Conceptualize services with particular instances
- Who specifies policies, rules etc?