Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Decentralized Enforcement of Artifact Lifecycles

391 views

Published on

Artifact-centric workflows describe possible executions of a business process through constraints expressed from the point of view of the documents exchanged between principals. A sequence of manipulations is deemed valid as long as every document in the workflow follows its prescribed lifecycle at all steps of the process. So far, establishing that a given workflow complies with artifact lifecycles has mostly been done through static verification, or by assuming a centralized access to all artifacts where these constraints can be monitored and enforced. We present in this paper an alternate method of enforcing document lifecycles that requires neither static verification nor single-point access. Rather, the document itself is designed to carry fragments of its history, protected from tampering using hashing and public-key encryption. Any principal involved in the process can verify at any time that a document’s history complies with a given lifecycle. Moreover, the proposed system also enforces access permissions: not all actions are visible to all principals, and one can only modify and verify what one is allowed to observe.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Decentralized Enforcement of Artifact Lifecycles

  1. 1. Decentralized Enforcement of Artifact Lifecycles Sylvain Hallé, Raphaël Khoury, Yliès Falcone and Antoine El-Hokayem Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, Canada Université Grenoble Alpes, France September 9th, 2016 BEST PAPER
  2. 2. $
  3. 3. $ DOCTOR PATIENT INSURANCE COMPANY PHARMACIST NURSE
  4. 4. $ DOCTOR PATIENT INSURANCE COMPANY PHARMACIST NURSE DOCUMENT
  5. 5. $ The doctor fills in the results of a test 1
  6. 6. $ Based on the results, the doctor adds a prescrip�on for a drug 2
  7. 7. $ The pharmacist writes the cost of the drug3 = $$
  8. 8. $ The insurance company approves the expense4
  9. 9. $ The pa�ent acknowledges5
  10. 10. $ The nurse writes the moment she gave the drug6
  11. 11. $$ Patient's address Insurance policy # Test results Prescription Cost Insurance approval Timestamps
  12. 12. Observa�ons The document follows a lifecycle A test result cannot be changed once wri�en X An expensive drug must be approved by the insurance company $$ "Lifecycle constraints"
  13. 13. Observa�ons The document has condi�ons on its integrity The pharmacologist cannot write test results The nurse cannot prescribe drugs X X "Write permissions"
  14. 14. Observa�ons The document is subject to privacy concerns The insurance company should not access test results The doctor should not know the pa�ent's policy number X X "Read permissions"
  15. 15. How can I be sure that these rules are being followed?
  16. 16. $ Solu�on A Centralized access to the document All accesses and modifica�ons are filtered and verified
  17. 17. $ Solu�on A Centralized access to the document Single point of failure Must be trusted
  18. 18. Solu�on B A�ach metadata to the document... + Use it to ensure confiden�ality and integrity of its contents and its history
  19. 19. Ingredients Set of peersP { , , , , } G Set of groups M : P × G → {⊤,⊥} Membership func�on A Set of ac�ons. Each ac�on is a func�on a : D → D D Set of documents 𝔹 Set of binary strings (e.g. hash values)
  20. 20. A document lifecycle specifies what ac�ons peers are allowed to make on a document and in which order δ Lifecycle func�on for group g ∈ Gg δ : S* → {⊤,⊥}g For a peer-ac�on sequence s ∈ S*, δ (s) = ⊤g ⇔ s complies with the lifecycle constraints
  21. 21. To ensure confiden�ality, ac�ons in the sequence will be encrypted. ħ Hash func�on Public-key encryp�on/decryp�on func�onsD,E Each group and each peer has a pair of public-private keys. KU, KV, KU, KV, , ...,,,
  22. 22. To ensure confiden�ality, ac�ons in the sequence will be encrypted. An ac�on a ∈ A will actually be recorded as: ⟨E[K , a],p,g,b⟩U,g All peers can see that some ac�on was executed Only members of g can know exactly which one (by decryp�ng with K ) The set S is actually 𝔹 × P × G × 𝔹 V,g ⇒ ?
  23. 23. The contents of a peer-ac�on are protected by a digest ⟨a,p,g,b⟩ ∈ 𝔹 × P × G × 𝔹 Encrypted ac�on Who is doing it On behalf of which group Digest How is it computed?
  24. 24. ⟨a',p',g',b'⟩.Suppose that the last peer ac�on is Peer p now wants to perform ac�on a on behalf of group g. The peer ac�on to append to the sequence is: where ⟨E[K , a],p,g,b⟩U,g b = E[K , ħ(b' ⋅ E[K , a] ⋅ g)]V,p U,g
  25. 25. When receiving a peer-ac�on sequence, each peer can check its validity, star�ng from the end. ... , ⟨a',p',g',b'⟩, ⟨a,p,g,b⟩ Step 1. Check that M(p,g) = ⊤. Step 2. Check that D[K , b] = ħ(b' ⋅ a ⋅ g)U,p This makes sure that: p has done the last ac�on on behalf of group g (to which he belongs) the last digest was indeed b'
  26. 26. Once the sequence is deemed valid, a peer can check the lifecycle func�on of a group g that he belongs to. Step 1. For every peer ac�on ⟨a',p',g',b'⟩ where g = g', compute a = D[K , a']. This yields a peer-ac�on sequence s where the ac�ons of group g appear in clear. Step 2. Check that δ (s) = ⊤. V,g g
  27. 27. ? X Tampering with the sequence can be detected by any peer Replacing an ac�on/peer by another Dele�ng/inser�ng an ac�on Even without knowing the ac�on Compliance with the lifecycle can be checked by any peer (of the same group) Can choose to reject a document that violates the spec
  28. 28. The amount of work on each new ac�on is constant Two encryp�ons, one hash Applied on a string of constant length Checking the sequence is linear The lifecycle func�on is arbitrary Considered as a "black box" throughout Can use LTL, FSM, BPMN, ... What about read/write permissions?
  29. 29. Suppose the exchange starts with an empty document. Replaying the sequence of ac�ons reconstructs the document up to its current state. But you can only replay the ac�ons of the groups you belong to! $$$$$$ Groups control the parts of the document that peers can read and write The "document" is not necessary; the peer- ac�on sequence is sufficient
  30. 30. ARTICHOKE Implementa�on of these concepts in PHP for PDF forms Uses hidden form fields to store peer-ac�on sequence (encoded as base-64) MD5 for hashing, RSA for encryp�on
  31. 31. ARTICHOKE $ artichoke Form.pdf fill -k private_key_Alice.pem -p Alice -o Form-filled.pdf F1 foo
  32. 32. ARTICHOKE $ artichoke Form.pdf dump Form fields ----------- F1 foo F2 bar Peer-action sequence -------------------- Alice W|F1|foo Rm/MRSzK... Bob W|F2|for kEvrkC+e...
  33. 33. ARTICHOKE $ artichoke Form.pdf check *.pem The lifecycle func�on can be any user-defined PHP code
  34. 34. 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Time(ms) Operations 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Time(ms) Operations 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000 26000 28000 30000 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Filesize(B) Operations ...wri�ng the sequence ...checking the sequence Sequence size Running �me for...
  35. 35. The complete trace must be kept forever Could we trim a prefix a�er some �me? Can detect viola�ons, but not prevent them A peer can choose to accept a tampered document Documents can be copied Divergent histories can be created Invent sufficient condi�ons to prevent this? Ac�ons can be guessed Try them all un�l you find the one that works Mi�gated by the size of A
  36. 36. Thank you! Ques�ons? http://slideshare.net/sylvainhalle http://leduotang.ca/sylvain http://liflab.ca

×