Abstract
Collaborative environments need access control to data and resources to increase working cooperation efficiently yet effectively. Several approaches are proposed and multiple access control models are recommended in this domain. In this paper, four Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) based collaborative models are selected for analysis and comparison. The standard RBAC model, Team-based Access Control (TMAC) model, Privacy-aware Role-Based Access Control (P-RBAC) model and Dynamic Sharing and Privacy-aware RBAC (DySP-RBAC) model are used for experiments. A prototype is developed for each of these models and pros and cons of these models are discussed. Performance and sharing parameters are used to compare these collaborative models. The standard RBAC model is found better by having a quick response time for queries as compared to other RBAC models. The DySP-RBAC model outperforms other models by providing enhanced sharing capabilities.
Highlights
User’s act of accessing data, information, and resources is controlled to keep check on authorized users and to avoid unauthorized users
A passive security model is the one that primarily serves the function of maintaining permission assignments, like Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) where permissions are assigned to roles
This paper focused on aforesaid RBAC models; Standard RBAC model, Team-based Access Control (TMAC) model, Privacy-aware RBAC model (P-RBAC) model, and DySP-RBAC model
Summary
User’s act of accessing data, information, and resources is controlled to keep check on authorized users and to avoid unauthorized users. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has provided the standard model for RBAC [1] It has been extended by many researchers to incorporate requirements posed by different applications and scenarios. Many different RBAC based models have been proposed for collaborative environments As such, it appeared that the RBAC model was a good candidate to provide access control. The first observation was a need for a hybrid access control model that incorporated the advantages of having broad, role-based permissions across object types, yet required fine-grained control on individual users in certain roles and on individual object instances. A second requirement was a need to recognize context associated with collaborative tasks and to apply this context for permission activation This can be better understood by drawing a distinction between active and passive security models. The standard RBAC model is not suitable for collaborative environments because it does not include many data elements that are fundamental for a collaborative www.ijacsa.thesai.org (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol 8, No 3, 2017 environment, such as team, task, user relationships, purpose of access and many more
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
