Semantic enforcement of privacy protection policies via the combination of ontologies and rules

Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 400-407

  Hu, Yuh Jong ^a   Guo, Hong Yi ^a   Lin, Guang De ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHENGCHI UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS; ELECTRIC BREAKDOWN; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION THEORY; SENSOR NETWORKS; SENSORS; UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING;

INFORMATION DISCLOSURES; PRIVACY PROTECTION;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 50949084465     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/SUTC.2008.59     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. A. H. Anderson. A comparison of two privacy policy languages: Epal and xacml. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Secure Web Services (SWS'06), pages 53-60. ACM, 2006.
2. I. A. Antón et al. A roadmap for comprehensive online for privacy policy management. Comm. of the ACM, 50(7):109-116, July 2007.
3. G. Antoniou et al. Rule-based policy specification. In T. Yu and S. Jajodia, editors, Secure Data Management in Decentralized Systems, pages 169-216. Springer, 2007.
4. M. Blaze, J. Figenebaum, and M. Strauss. Compliance checking in the policymaker trust management system. In Proc. of the Financial Cryptography, LNCS 1465, pages 254-274. Springer, 1998.
5. A. P. Bonatti, S. D. C. di Vimercati, and P. Smarati. An algebra for composing access control policies. ACM Trans. on Information and Systems Security, 5(1):1-35, February 2002.
6. A. P. Bonatti et al. Semantic web policies - a discussion of requirements and research issues. In 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006), Budva, Montenergro, June 2006.
7. L. Cranor et al. The platform for privacy preferences (p3p) 1.0 (p3p 1.0) specification, 2002. http://www.w3.org/P3P/.
8. L. Cranor, M. Langheinrich, and M. Marchiori. A p3p preference exchange language 1.0 (appel 1.0), 2002. http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P-preferences/.
9. M. F. Donini et al. AL-log: Integrating datalog and description logics. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 10(3):227-252, 1998.
10. S. Fischer-Hübner. IT-Security and Privacy - Design and Use of Privacy-Enhancing Security Mechanisms. LNCS 1958. Springer, 2001.
11. N. B. Grosof et al. Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logic. In World Wide Web 2003, pages 48-65, Budapest, Hungary, 2003.
12. I. Horrocks et al. Swrl: A semantic web rule language combing owl and ruleml, 2004. http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/.
13. S. Jajodia et al. Flexible support for multiple access control policies. ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 26(2):214-260, June 2001.
14. L. Kagal, T. Finin, and A. Joshi. A policy based approach to security for the semantic web. In International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) 2003, LNCS 2870, pages 402-418, 2003.
15. G. Karjoth and M. Schunter. A privacy policy model for enterprises. In 15th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW). IEEE, June 2002.
16. G. Karjoth, M. Schunter, and M. Waidner. Platform for enterprise privacy practices: Privacy-enabled management of customer data. In 2nd Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PET), LNCS. Springer, 2002.
17. N. Li, T. Yu, and A. I. Antón. A semantics-approach to privacy languages. Computer Systems and Engineering (CSSE), 21(5), Sep. 2006.
18. J. Maluszynski. Hybrid integration of rules and dl-based ontologies. In J. Maluszynski, editor, Combining Rules and Ontologies. A survey, pages 55-72. EU FP6 Network of Excellence (NoE), Feb. 2005. REWERSE.
19. B. Motik et al. Can owl and logic programming live together happily ever after? In 5th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) 2006, LNCS 4273, Athens, GA, USA, Nov. 2006.
20. B. Motik, U. Sattler, and R. Studer. Query answering for owl-dl with rules. In 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) 2004, LNCS 3298, pages 549-563. Springer, 2004.
21. J. Park and R. T. Sandhu. The uconABC usage control model. ACM Trans. on Information and System Security, 7(1):128-174, 2004.
22. R. Rosati. On the decidability and complexity of integrating ontologies and rules. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 3, pages 61-73, 2005.
23. R. Rosati. DL+log: Tight integration of description logics and disjunctive datalog. In Proc. of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), 2006.
24. R. Rosati. Integrating ontologies and rules: Semantic and computational issues. In Reasoning Web 2006, LNCS 4126, pages 128-151, 2006.
25. G. Tonti et al. Semantic web languages for policy representation and reasoning: A comparison of kaos, rei, and ponder. In 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) 2003, LNCS 2870, pages 419-437, 2003.
26. S. D. C. d. Vimercati et al. Access control policies and languages in open environments. In T. Yu and S. Jajodia, editors, Secure Data Management in Decentralized Systems, pages 21-58. Springer, 2007.
27. D. J. Weitzner et al. Creating a policy-aware web: Discretionary, rule-based access for the world wide web. In E. Ferrari and B. Thuraisingham, editors, Web and Information Security, pages 1-31. Idea Group Inc., 2006.
28. Y. C. T. Woo and S. S. Lam. Authorization in distributed systems: a new approach. Journal of Computer Security, 2(2-3):107-136, 1993.
29. T. Yu, A. N. Li, and I. Antón. A formal semantics for p3p. In ACM Workshop on Secure Web Services, Fairfax, VA, USA, Oct. 2004. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/750176.html.