Consistency Checking of Safety and Availability in Access Control
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The safety and availability policies are very important in an access control system for ensuring security and success when performing a certain task. However, conflicts may arise between safety and availability policies due to their opposite focuses. In this paper, we address the problem of consistency checking for safety and availability policies, especially for the co-existence of static separation-of-duty (SSoD) policies with availability policies, which determines whether there exists an access control state that satisfies all of these policies. We present criteria for determining consistency with a number of special cases, and show that the general case and partial subcases of the problem are intractable (NP-hard) and in the Polynomial Hierarchy NPNP. We design an algorithm to efficiently solve the nontrivial size instances for the intractable cases of the problem. The running example shows the validity of the proposed algorithm. The investigation will help the security officer to specify reasonable access control policies when both safety and availability policies coexist.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it