This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "March 2nd, 2010 Security Conference Call"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finaversaggi (talk | contribs) |
Finaversaggi (talk | contribs) m (→Announcements) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
***Sequence diagram shows the final step of the negotiation (consenter has the choice to accept the outcome of the negotiation or to reject it, in which case, nothing is done | ***Sequence diagram shows the final step of the negotiation (consenter has the choice to accept the outcome of the negotiation or to reject it, in which case, nothing is done | ||
**The Related Information and Associations slides show the information related to the Negotiate Privacy Policy use case and the relationships between the classes to arrive at the Information Model | **The Related Information and Associations slides show the information related to the Negotiate Privacy Policy use case and the relationships between the classes to arrive at the Information Model | ||
| − | **The model has NOT been changed – these slides are merely to describe the analysis flow from the business use cases to the technical use cases, sequence diagrams and information model. | + | **The model has NOT been changed – these slides are merely to describe the analysis flow from the business use cases to the technical use cases, sequence diagrams and information model. |
| − | |||
==Minutes== | ==Minutes== | ||
Revision as of 20:29, 2 March 2010
Contents
Security Work Group Weekly Conference Call
Meeting Information
Attendees
- Tabitha Albertson
- Bernd Blobel Security Co-chair, absent
- Jim Buckner
- Steven Connolly
- Mike Davis Security Co-chair, absent
- Suzanne Gonzales-Webb CBCC Co-chair, absent
- Rob Horn
- Don Jorgenson
- John Moehrke Security Co-chair
- Milan Petkovic
- Pay Pyette
- Ioana Singureanu
- Serafina Versaggi scribe
- Craig Winter
Agenda
- (05 min) Roll Call, Approve Minutes Feb 23rd, 2010 & Call for Additional Agenda Items
- (40 min) Harmonized Privacy and Security DAM Peer Review
- Negotiate Policies Use Case - deep dive
ACTIVE PROJECTS
- (15 min) Security and Privacy Ontology project
Announcements
An update to the Harmonized Security Domain Analysis Model presentation has been posted on GForge in the Doc section under the Security Domain Analysis (DAM)Project folder
- Update to this presentation includes:
- Added analysis for Use Case S.4 Negotiate Privacy Policy
- Slides were added at the end of the presentation
- They show how the use case relates to technical implementation of the Access Control System (ACS)
- The elaboration shows how to automate the use case – as there needs to be a way for the consenter to submit privacy preferences that could be adjudicated by the ACS in an automated fashion since the use case is a set of manual steps
- The elaboration assumes that the work for the use case is performed by automated systems
- Sequence diagram shows the final step of the negotiation (consenter has the choice to accept the outcome of the negotiation or to reject it, in which case, nothing is done
- The Related Information and Associations slides show the information related to the Negotiate Privacy Policy use case and the relationships between the classes to arrive at the Information Model
- The model has NOT been changed – these slides are merely to describe the analysis flow from the business use cases to the technical use cases, sequence diagrams and information model.
- Added analysis for Use Case S.4 Negotiate Privacy Policy
Minutes
1. Action Items
- Team: Please submit peer review comments to the Harmonized Security Domain Analysis Model by COB March 4, 2010
