Detecting conflicts between a generated access management policy and invoked access management policies

Conflicts may be detected between a generated access management policy and invoked identity and access management policies. An access management policy to be updated to provide expected results for example requests may be received. Another access management policy that would be invoked to evaluate the example access requests may be identified. A conflict between the expected results for the updates and the invoked access management policy may be determined. An indication of the conflict between the expected results of the example requests may be provided.

BACKGROUND

A cloud provider, or other provider network, may implement multiple network-based services. These services may provide different functionality, such as computational resources, storage resources, data transmission, among various others. Access controls to coordinate the identity and privileges of different users to obtain, use or otherwise manage resources from the network-based services may be implemented to secure the use of managed resources for authorized users.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

Various techniques for generating access management policies from example requests are described herein. Identity and access management systems may support various features to control access to resources hosted in other network-based services. Access management policies, for example, may specify various actions and effects with respect to resources in different network-based services in order to provide fine-grained access control, in various embodiments. Access management policies may be specified in various ways, in human-readable formats, such as JavaScript Object Notation or other system-specific policy languages (e.g., as supported by identity and access management service 210 in FIG. 2). As access to the number of resources and services managed through the use of access management policies increases, the complexity of creating new or edit policies to account for additional scenarios becomes more challenging.

For example, if certain type of application request for a resource were to fail because an access management policy was enforced that did not allow the request, it may be difficult for a user to determine how to modify the access management policy to allow the request. Techniques for generating access management policies from example requests, however, may be implemented in various embodiments that would take the example request as well as an expected result (e.g., the request being allowed), and automatically generate a new policy that when enforced would allow the request. Such techniques may prevent time-consuming, complicated, and error-prone manual edits (e.g., leading to unintended failure scenarios as a result of introduced errors). Moreover, automatic generation of access management policies may allow for policy simplification and other optimization techniques be applied, which may result in better understood and more effective access management policies that are generated.

FIG. 1 illustrates a logical block diagram of generating access management policies from example requests, according to some embodiments. Policy generator 110 may be implemented as part of an identity and access management (IAM) system (e.g., as discussed below with regard to FIG. 1) and/or as standalone application, which may be applicable to policies for an identity and access management system. As discussed in detail below with regard to FIGS. 2-5, policy generator 110 may implement various interfaces (e.g., policy generator interface 510 in FIG. 5), which may allow a user to provider or specify an existing access management policy 120, which may include various allowed actions in allowed configuration 122 as well as various denied actions in denied configuration 124. As discussed below, access management policy 120 may be specified in various formats, including but not limited to, human-readable formats, such as Javascript Object Notation (JSON), and/or domain-specific, service-specific or system-specific policy languages, such as a policy language supported by identity and access management service 210 in FIG. 2. In some embodiments, access management policy 120 may be an “empty” policy that has no existing content, which may be generated based on the positive request(s) 130 and negative request(s) 140.

Policy generator 110 may also receive positive request(s) 130. Positive request(s) 130 may be examples of requests that specify one or more actions with respect to one or more resources with an expected result of being allowed by the new access management policy 150. Similarly, policy generator 110 may receive negative request(s) 140. Negative request(s) may be examples of requests that specify one or more actions with respect to one or more resources with an expected result of being denied by the new access management policy 150. Different combinations of positive requests 130 and/or negative requests 140 may be used by policy generator 110 to generate new access management policy 150, including scenarios with only positive requests 130 (or a single positive request 130), only negative request(s) 140 (or a single negative request 140), and some combination of the same or different numbers of both positive 130 and negative 140 requests.

Policy generator 110 may apply various techniques to generate new access management policy 150 that includes a modified allowed configuration 152 and/or modified denied configuration 154, such as the techniques discussed below with regard to FIGS. 3-4 and 6-8. In some embodiments, policy generator 110 may detect conflicts with other access management policies that are inform or are otherwise invoked by example positive 130 and negative requests 140 in order to identify those scenarios where a modification to another policy may have to be performed in order to achieve a desired result for the example requests. Policy generator 110 may provide new access management policy 150 via various types of interfaces for display and/or further editing.

The previous description of a policy generator in FIG. 1 is a logical illustration and thus is not to be construed as limiting as to the architecture for implementing a policy generator.

This specification begins with a general description of a provider network that implements an identity and access management service that generates access management policies from example requests. Then various examples of the identity and access management service including different components/modules, or arrangements of components/module that may be employed as part of implementing the identity and access management service are discussed. A number of different methods and techniques to implement generating access management policies from example requests are then discussed, some of which are illustrated in accompanying flowcharts. Finally, a description of an example computing system upon which the various components, modules, systems, devices, and/or nodes may be implemented is provided. Various examples are provided throughout the specification.

FIG. 2 is a logical block diagram illustrating a provider network implementing an identity and access control management service that implements policy generation using example requests, according to some embodiments. In various embodiments, a provider network 200 may be a private or closed system or may be set up by an entity such as a company or a public sector organization to provide one or more services (such as various types of cloud-based storage, processing, or other computing resources) accessible via the Internet and/or other networks to clients 270. The provider network may be implemented in a single location or may include numerous data centers hosting various resource pools, such as collections of physical and/or virtualized computer servers, storage devices, networking equipment and the like (e.g., computing system 1000 described below with regard to FIG. 9), needed to implement and distribute the infrastructure and storage services offered by the provider network.

For example, the provider network (which may, in some implementations, be referred to as a “cloud provider network” or simply as a “cloud”) may refer to a pool of network-accessible computing resources (such as compute, storage, and networking resources, applications, and services), which may be virtualized or bare-metal (e.g., providing direct access to underlying hardware without a virtualization platform). In this way, the provider network can provide convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources that can be programmatically provisioned and released in response to customer commands. These resources can be dynamically provisioned and reconfigured to adjust to variable load.

The provider network can be formed as a number of regions, such as provider network regions, where a region may be a separate geographical area in which the provider network clusters or manages data centers, in some embodiments. Each region 200 may include two or more availability zones (sometimes referred to as fault tolerant zones) connected to one another via a private high speed network, for example a fiber communication connection. An availability zone (also known as an availability domain, or simply a “zone”) refers to an isolated failure domain including one or more data center facilities with separate power, separate networking, and separate cooling from those in another availability zone. Preferably, availability zones within a region are positioned far enough away from one another that the same natural disaster should not take more than one availability zone offline at the same time. Clients 270 can connect to availability zones of the provider network via a publicly accessible network (e.g., the Internet, a cellular communication network). Regions may be connected to a global network which includes private networking infrastructure (e.g., fiber connections controlled by the cloud provider) connecting each region to at least one other region. The provider network may deliver content from points of presence outside of, but networked with, these regions 200 by way of edge locations and regional edge cache servers. This compartmentalization and geographic distribution of computing hardware enables the provider network to provide low-latency resource access to customers on a global scale with a high degree of fault tolerance and stability.

In some embodiments, a provider network may implement various computing resources or services across one or more regions, such as identity and management service 210 and other services 250, which may include a virtual compute service, data processing service(s) (e.g., map reduce, data flow, and/or other large scale data processing techniques), data storage services (e.g., object storage services, block-based storage services, database services, or data warehouse storage services) and/or any other type of network-based services (which may include various other types of storage, processing, analysis, communication, event handling, visualization, and security services not illustrated). The resources used to support the operations of such services (e.g., compute and storage resources) may be provisioned in an account associated with the provider network, in contrast to resources requested by users of the provider network 200, which may be provisioned in user accounts, in some embodiments.

In various embodiments, the components illustrated in FIG. 2 may be implemented directly within computer hardware, as instructions directly or indirectly executable by computer hardware (e.g., a microprocessor or computer system), or using a combination of these techniques. For example, the components of FIG. 2 may be implemented by a system that includes a number of computing nodes (or simply, nodes), each of which may be similar to the computer system 1000 illustrated in FIG. 9 and described below. In various embodiments, the functionality of a given system or service component (e.g., a component of identity and access management services 210 or other services 250) may be implemented by a particular node or may be distributed across several nodes. In some embodiments, a given node may implement the functionality of more than one service system component (e.g., more than one data store component).

Identity and access management service 210 may policy generation techniques, as discussed above with regard to FIG. 1 and below with regard to FIGS. 3-8. Identity and access management service 210 may provide operators of other services 250 with the ability to enforce access controls for various types of users and various roles of users associated with an account according to the identity determined for and shared by identity and access management service 210. For example, identity and access management service 210 can provide fine-grained access controls to different service resources, support different authentication techniques or protocols, such as multi-factor authentication (MFA), support analysis or tools for specifying access controls, and integration features for external or alternative identity and access control mechanisms, in some embodiments. User controls may be implemented to determine what, wherein, and when users can access resources and how the resources may be used by users, including federated users to provide management for groups of users and/or roles which may support features like single sign-on (SSO), in some embodiments.

Identity and access management service 210 may implement interface 212. Interface 212 may be a programmatic interface (e.g., supporting one or more APIs), graphical (e.g., providing a web-based console or other graphical control), and/or command line interfaces, in various embodiments, to allow for the specification and management of various identity and access management service 210 features, including creating, editing, and generating access management policies as discussed below with regard to FIGS. 3-5 for performing access operations.

Identity and access management service 210 may implement policy enforcement 220, in various embodiments. For example, various access control management policies may be specified and enforced for different account resource(s) 252 in other services 250. Policy enforcement 220 may serve as an authorization and access control for various requests, operations, or other actions taken with respect to account resources by various users, accounts, roles, and/or other identities by enforcing access management policies according to the various features specified in the access management policies. For example, policy enforcement 220 may interpret these policies, determine whether and what resources and actions are within the scope of a policy and provide access control information to other services in order for other services to allow or deny requests directed to account resource(s) 252. Identity and access management store 214 may store the created and enforced account policies 215, in various embodiments.

In various embodiments, policy management 230 may implement policy editor 234. As discussed in detail below with regard to FIGS. 3-5, various interfaces and/or interactions may be used to allow users to create, edit, and/or remove access management policies. In this way, users can take advantage of the flexible and customizable features of access control policies to tailor access control management for specific scenarios in an account. Policy editor 234 may, in some embodiments, invoke policy generator 232, in order to generate or provide a policy to policy editor 234.

Because errors in policies can lead to unintended consequences when enforced (e.g., being overly permissive or restrictive upon operations), policy management 230 may implement policy evaluator 232, in some embodiments. In this way, policy evaluator 232 can provide a user with feedback to correct, modify, or optimize that would otherwise lead to undesirable outcomes when a given access management policy was enforced. FIG. 5 provides a detailed discussion of policy evaluation including the use of resource state information to provide context-sensitive and dynamic evaluation of policies that adapts and optimizes policy evaluation different across different accounts.

Generally speaking, clients 270 may encompass any type of client configurable to submit network-based requests to provider network regions 200 via network 260, including requests for other services 250 (e.g., a request to create a database, start a computation job, setup a data stream, etc.). In some embodiments, operators of a service (e.g., service 250) may be a client 270 that performs requests to specify quorum controls and/or access control operations, in some embodiments. For example, a given client 270 may include a suitable version of a web browser, or may include a plug-in module or other type of code module configured to access a management console to specify quorum controls and/or access control operations. In some embodiments, such an application may include sufficient protocol support (e.g., for a suitable version of Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)) for generating and processing network-based services requests without necessarily implementing full browser support for all types of network-based data. That is, client 270 may be an application configured to interact directly with provider network region 200. In some embodiments, client 270 may be configured to generate network-based services requests according to a Representational State Transfer (REST)-style network-based services architecture, a document- or message-based network-based services architecture, or another suitable network-based services architecture. Although clients 270 are illustrated as external to provider network 200, in some embodiments clients of different services, like other services 250, can be implemented within provider network region 200 (e.g., implemented on a resource of another service 250, such as virtual compute instance).

Clients 270 may convey network-based services requests to and receive responses from provider network regions 200 via network 260. In various embodiments, network 260 may encompass any suitable combination of networking hardware and protocols necessary to establish network-based-based communications between clients 270 and provider network regions 200. For example, network 260 may generally encompass the various telecommunications networks and service providers that collectively implement the Internet. Network 260 may also include private networks such as local area networks (LANs) or wide area networks (WANs) as well as public or private wireless networks. For example, both a given client 270 and provider network region 200 may be respectively provisioned within enterprises having their own internal networks. In such an embodiment, network 260 may include the hardware (e.g., modems, routers, switches, load balancers, proxy servers, etc.) and software (e.g., protocol stacks, accounting software, firewall/security software, etc.) necessary to establish a networking link between given client 270 and the Internet as well as between the Internet and provider network region 200. It is noted that in some embodiments, clients may communicate with provider network region 200 using a private network rather than the public Internet.

FIG. 3 is a logical block diagram illustrating an example policy generator that generates a new access management policy from example requests, according to some embodiments. Policy generator 300 may be implemented as part of identity and access management service 210, as discussed above in FIG. 2 or as a standalone application, in some embodiments. Policy generator 300 may receive, via an interface, a request to generate a new access management policy 302 that may include a policy 303 (or an identifier to lookup or obtain the policy), zero, one, or multiple positive examples 304, zero, one, or multiple negative examples 305, and, in some embodiments, a simplification precision indicator, as discussed below.

In various embodiments, policies may include various features included in one or more statements, such as action (e.g., service actions allowed or denied by a policy), effect (e.g., allows or denies actions), resource (e.g., resource identifier, name or other information which the policy is attached), principal (e.g., an account, user, role, or other mechanism for making access decisions to allow or deny, among others (e.g., policy language version, conditions, identifiers for statements, etc.). These features of a policy can be specified and then evaluated according to the various techniques discussed below.

In various embodiments, path form conversion 310 may generate an access management policy into disjoint paths, as discussed in detail below with regard to FIGS. 6-7. In various embodiments, policy generator 300 may implement example request incorporation 320, in various embodiments. Example request incorporation 320 may for each positive request, add a new Allow statement and/or shrink an existing Deny statement in the policy 302 as needed. For each negative request, example request incorporation 320 may add a new Deny statement in the policy as needed.

In various embodiments, policy simplification 330 may identify possible simplifications by merging paths in the generated policy. In some embodiments, policy simplification 330 may then prune or remove various features according to the simplification parameter, as discussed below with regard to FIG. 7. For example, policy simplification may remove features without changing permissions or may remove features, providing a more permissive policy (that still satisfies the expected results of the example requests) and return warning information that identifies how permissions have changed. Policy generator 300 may implement document form conversion 340 to transform the simplified version of the policy from path form into a document form (e.g., a text format in the policy language), which may then be provided as the new access management policy 350.

As noted above, in some embodiments, conflicts can arise between a policy being generated and other policies which may have an effect on requests evaluated using the generated policy, such as the provided example requests. FIG. 4 is a logical block diagram illustrating an example policy generator that detects conflicts between a generated access management policy and invoked access management policy, according to some embodiments. Similar to FIG. 3, policy generator 400 may be implemented as part of access management policy service 210, in some embodiments, or separately. Policy generator 400 may receive, via an interface, a request to generate a new access management policy 402 that may include a policy 403 (or an identifier to lookup or obtain the policy), zero, one, or multiple positive examples 404, zero, one, or multiple negative examples 405, and a parameter to perform a conflict check, as indicated at 406.

In various embodiments, path form conversion 410 may generate an access management policy into disjoint paths, as discussed in detail below with regard to FIGS. 6-7. In various embodiments, policy generator 400 may implement example request incorporation 420. Example request incorporation 420 may for each positive request, add a new Allow statement and/or shrink an existing Deny statement in the policy 402 as needed. For each negative request, example request incorporation 420 may add a new Deny statement in the policy as needed.

In various embodiments, policy generator 400 may implement invoked policy context 430, in some embodiments. For example, invoked policy context 430 may get 432 account polic(ies) 480 based on the request to identify any other policies applicable to the example requests. For example, service-wide or resource policies may be applicable depending on the resource being targeted in the request or account-wide policies may be identified according to an identity of the user in the request. Invoked policy context may then add further paths to the converted new policy to be considered together by policy conflict check 440.

Policy conflict check 440 may compare the added paths for invoked or otherwise applicable policies to the paths generated for the new policy to check for blocks. Block paths may, for instance, illustrate when an action with respect to a resource cannot have the expect result because of a countervailing path from the invoked policy context. Policy conflict check 440 may send an indication of a policy conflict 442, in some embodiments. In some embodiments, a correction 444 to the conflicting policy may be suggested.

For policies that do not have a conflict, policy generator 400 may proceed with other features. For example, policy simplification 450 may identify possible simplifications by merging paths in the generated policy. In some embodiments, policy simplification 450 may then prune or remove various features according to the simplification parameter, as discussed below with regard to FIG. 7. For example, policy simplification may remove features without changing permissions or may remove features, providing a more permissive policy (that still satisfies the expected results of the example requests) and return warning information that identifies how permissions have changed. Policy generator 400 may implement document form conversion 460 to transform the simplified version of the policy from path form into a document form (e.g., a text format in the policy language), which may then be provided as the new access management policy 470.

FIG. 5 illustrates an example user interface for a policy generator, according to some embodiments. Policy generator interface 510 may provide a graphical interface policy generators 300 and/or 400, in some embodiments. For example, generator input 520 may provide an input policy 522 element, which may allow user to enter a policy text or upload, link to a policy. Generator input may include input elements to specify positive requests 524 and negative requests 526. Various other generator parameters, such as simplification precision 532 and whether to perform a policy conflict check 534 may be provided using various use interface elements (e.g., drop down menus).

After selecting the input to generate the policy 536, various results may be displayed in result view 540. For example, one or multiple generated policies, 542 and 544 may be displayed (e.g., according to simplified and non-simplified versions). As indicated at 546 conflict(s) may be displayed as well as policy warnings 548 which may illustrate a change in policy scope.

In at least some embodiments, display or providing of different generated policies may be occur interactively based on one or more requests. For example, an initial policy generation request may specify a low (or no) simplification. Then, a second request may cause the generation and display of a simplified version of the new policy. Then a third request may cause the generation and display of a simplified version of the new policy with a high precision parameter. In this way, a user could move between displays of multiple versions of a policy in order to see the effect of different selected options (e.g., different simplification parameters), in some embodiments.

Although FIGS. 2-5 have been described and illustrated in the context of an identify and access management service, the various techniques and components illustrated and described in FIGS. 2-5 may be easily applied to other access control systems in different embodiments for one or multiple different systems or services, which may be public or private. As such, FIGS. 2-5 are not intended to be limiting as to other embodiments of a system that may implement resource state evaluation of access management policies.

Various different systems and devices may implement the various methods and techniques described below, either singly or working together. For example, an identity and access management service such as described above with regard to FIGS. 2-4 may be configured to implement the various methods. Therefore, the above examples and or any other systems or devices referenced as performing the illustrated method, are not intended to be limiting as to other different components, modules, systems, or configurations of systems and devices.

FIG. 6 is a high-level flowchart illustrating various methods and techniques to implement resource state evaluation of access management policies, according to some embodiments. As indicated at 610, an access management policy and example request(s) to be evaluated according to the access management policy with respective expected results for the example requests may be received, in various embodiments. For example, a current access management policy “P” as well as list of one or more positive requests “Rp” and a list of one or more negative requests “Rn” may be received.

As indicated at 620, update(s) to the access management policy that cause the expected results for the example requests to occur when a new version of the access management policy based on the updates is enforced may be determined, in various embodiments. For example, the new version of the policy may differ from the old policy by allowing the positive requests and denying the negative requests. When a request is both positive and negative, it will be denied by the new policy. Thus, in some embodiments, the new policy P′ may satisfy:

{requests allowed by P′}=({requests allowed by P}∪Rp)\Rn.

In some embodiments, updates may also simplify an initially generated policy using the example requests according to a simplification parameter, as discussed in detail below with regard to FIG. 7. For example, an “equivalent” simplification parameter may automatically simplify an initially generated policy by removing redundant features without changing the generated policy's permissions. In some embodiments, an “aggressive” simplification parameter may simplify the initially generated policy to be shorter and more permissive than the initially generated policy (but still providing the explicitly request positive and negative request results). Warning information may be provided to indicate how the simplified policy has become more permissive, in some embodiments.

As indicated at 630, the new version of the access management policy may be generated based on the determined updates, in various embodiments. For example, the identified updates along with various simplifications or other optimizations may be combined to recreate a new policy document in the policy language, in some embodiments. As indicated at 640, the new version of the policy may be provided, in some embodiments. For example, various interfaces, programmatic, graphical, and/or textual (e.g., command line), may display the new version of the access management policy.

In various embodiments, including the policy generation techniques discussed above and below, some rules, assumptions, and/or other criteria for a policy language that defines an access management policy may be used or relied upon. In some embodiments, the policy language may specify that each action/resource literal may contain at most one wildcard character at the end, and that there are no conditions in policies. For example, let ACTION be the set of action literals. Let RESOURCE be the set of resource literals.

For handling wildcards (e.g. “*”) in a policy language, in various embodiments it may be the case that

To relax this assumption in some policy generation techniques, a set of literals L with a subtraction operator SUB may be found such that, for any literals l1, l2∈L:

In various embodiments, example requests may have the following abstract grammar:

If a wildcard is present in an example positive/negative requests, these requests may be first pre-processed by rewriting them until literals are disjoint, similar to the pre-processing of policies discussed below.

In various embodiments, policies may have the following abstract grammar:

To work with conditions, in various embodiments, actions and resources may be treated as two fields. Treat each condition as an additional field that may also be conjuncted together. In such a scenario, a path may contain not only the action and resource fields but also all of the relevant condition fields. In this way, conditions may be included in the paths.

In view of the above considerations, techniques for generating a new version of a policy based on example requests may be performed. FIG. 7 is a high-level flowchart illustrating various methods and techniques to implement determining updates that would cause results from example requests in a generated access management policy, according to some embodiments. As indicated at 710, an access management policy may be converted into path form, in some embodiments. For example, a policy generator may:

As indicated at 730, allow statement(s) and/or modify an existing Deny statement(s) may be added to create a new version of an access management policy for received example requests with a positive (e.g., allowed) result in the path form of the access management policy (as discussed above), in various embodiments. As indicated at 720, similarly, Deny statement(s) may be added to create a new version of an access management policy for received example requests with a negative (e.g., denied) result in the path form of the access management policy (as discussed above), in various embodiments.

As indicated at 740, simplification(s) in the policy may be identified for the new version of the access management policy from the path form of the access management policy. For example, a policy generator may:

As discussed above, simplification precision parameters may be received, in some embodiments, to determine how much to optimize or condense a new version of a policy being generated. As indicated at 750, simplifications may be performed on the path form of the new version of the access management policy according to a simplification precision parameter. For example, a policy generator may:

As noted discussed above, to allow positive requests, a policy generator may relax a provided policy so that it allows positive requests. In order to perform simplification, the amount of relaxing performed on the policy may be reduced. For example, consider an old policy P, a set of positive requests Rp, and a policy P″ obtained from steps 710 and 720 above. P may be relaxed minimally if the following holds:

{requests allowed by P″}={requests allowed by P}∪Rp.

Relaxing the policy minimally may produce a new policy that exceeds a size limits for policies, in some embodiments. Also, the new policy may contain many literals that appear haphazard or distracting to a reader of the new policy. Therefore, the simplification precision parameter may be used to tune how much detail to drop from the new policy.

In some embodiments, the precision parameter may be set to multiple different values (e.g., High, Medium, and Low). High precision may produce the minimally relaxed policy in full detail. Medium precision may prune action literals by the valid action names (e.g., in host service documentation) and prune resource literals by the resources used elsewhere in the old policy. Low precision may first prunes literals as with Medium and then prune them further by picking a top number (e.g., 5) based on how well they match the valid action names/used resource names. Note that the precision heuristics may be different in different use cases or scenarios.

In various embodiments, the following example algorithm that relaxes an old policy P minimally to allow one positive request R:

As indicated at 750, the simplified new version of the access management policy may be converted back into a document form, in some embodiments. For example, the various paths may be traversed in order to generate the corresponding new version of the access management policy.

As discussed above with regard to FIGS. 1 and 4, generating a policy to achieve expected results may implicate other policies which may also affect whether the expected results of for example requests made with respect to one policy are achieved. In some embodiments, an access management policy may include different types, such as identity policy (e.g., associated with a user, group, or role), a resource policy (e.g., associated with a resource hosted or implemented in a provider network such as provider network 200), session policy (e.g., limiting access features to a particular session), access control list policy, service control policy (e.g., service-wide policy attributes), permission boundary policy (e.g., describing permissions that can be granted in another policy, among other policies. In various embodiments, many different types of policies may be linked, associated, or otherwise invoked, such that a policy of a different type may affect the enforcement of a policy being generated (e.g., an account-wide or service-specific policy may have features that supersede or inform an identity based policy for one user or role within the account or service). FIG. 8 is a high-level flowchart illustrating various methods and techniques to implement detecting conflicts between a generated access management policy and invoked access management policy, according to some embodiments.

As indicated at 810, a first access management policy and example request(s) to be evaluated according to the first access management policy with respective results for the example request(s) may be received, in some embodiments. In various embodiments, the policy and example request(s) may be received along with a parameter or other indicator to perform a conflict check with respect to other policies.

As indicated at 820, a second access management policy that would be invoked to evaluate the example request(s) in addition to the first access management policy may be identified, in some embodiments. For example, a request evaluation may be performed by an identity and access management system which may according to the request identify any other policies applicable to the request. For example, service-wide or resource policies may be applicable depending on the resource being targeted in the request or account-wide policies may be identified according to an identity of the user in the request.

As indicated at 830, a conflict may be determined between the respective expected results for the example request(s) and the second access management policy, in some embodiments. For example, similar to the discussion above with regard to FIG. 7, allow and/or deny statements may be added (or modified) according to the requests and transformed into paths. Additionally, applicable paths for the requests may be generated from the second access management policy and included for evaluation. If the application of one path from the second policy blocks a path from the newly generated policy, then conflict may exist.

As indicated at 840, an indication of the conflict between the respective expected results for the example requests and the second access management policy may be provided, in some embodiments. For example, an interface for a policy generator may display a conflict by identifying the conflicting request and second policy. In some embodiments, a suggested correction may be provided. For example, an allow statement to be included in the second policy can be generated according to the blocking path of the second policy. In some embodiments, the interface may provide an option or element to submit a request to modify the conflict policy. In some embodiments, a permission check may be first performed to see if a user submitting the requested change to the second policy has permission to make the change. If the user does not have permission, a request to send a notification to a user or other owner of the second policy can be requested and sent, including the requested change to be made.

In the illustrated embodiment, computer system 1000 includes one or more processors 1010 coupled to a system memory 1020 via an input/output (I/O) interface 1030. Computer system 1000 further includes a network interface 1040 coupled to I/O interface 1030, and one or more input/output devices 1050, such as cursor control device 1060, keyboard 1070, and display(s) 1080. Display(s) 1080 may include standard computer monitor(s) and/or other display systems, technologies or devices. In at least some implementations, the input/output devices 1050 may also include a touch- or multi-touch enabled device such as a pad or tablet via which a user enters input via a stylus-type device and/or one or more digits. In some embodiments, it is contemplated that embodiments may be implemented using a single instance of computer system 1000, while in other embodiments multiple such systems, or multiple nodes making up computer system 1000, may be configured to host different portions or instances of embodiments. For example, in one embodiment some elements may be implemented via one or more nodes of computer system 1000 that are distinct from those nodes implementing other elements.

In various embodiments, computer system 1000 may be a uniprocessor system including one processor 1010, or a multiprocessor system including several processors 1010 (e.g., two, four, eight, or another suitable number). Processors 1010 may be any suitable processor capable of executing instructions. For example, in various embodiments, processors 1010 may be general-purpose or embedded processors implementing any of a variety of instruction set architectures (ISAs), such as the x86, PowerPC, SPARC, or MIPS ISAs, or any other suitable ISA. In multiprocessor systems, each of processors 1010 may commonly, but not necessarily, implement the same ISA.

System memory 1020 may be configured to store program instructions and/or data accessible by processor 1010. In various embodiments, system memory 1020 may be implemented using any suitable memory technology, such as static random access memory (SRAM), synchronous dynamic RAM (SDRAM), nonvolatile/Flash-type memory, or any other type of memory. In the illustrated embodiment, program instructions and data implementing desired functions, such as those described above (e.g., policy evaluators and/or other features of identity and access control systems, services or other systems that implement resource state evaluation of access control policies) are shown stored within system memory 1020 as program instructions 1025 and data storage 1035, respectively. In other embodiments, program instructions and/or data may be received, sent or stored upon different types of computer-accessible media or on similar media separate from system memory 1020 or computer system 1000. Generally speaking, a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium may include storage media or memory media such as magnetic or optical media, e.g., disk or CD/DVD-ROM coupled to computer system 1000 via I/O interface 1030. Program instructions and data stored via a computer-readable medium may be transmitted by transmission media or signals such as electrical, electromagnetic, or digital signals, which may be conveyed via a communication medium such as a network and/or a wireless link, such as may be implemented via network interface 1040.

In one embodiment, I/O interface 1030 may be configured to coordinate I/O traffic between processor 1010, system memory 1020, and any peripheral devices in the device, including network interface 1040 or other peripheral interfaces, such as input/output devices 1050. In some embodiments, I/O interface 1030 may perform any necessary protocol, timing or other data transformations to convert data signals from one component (e.g., system memory 1020) into a format suitable for use by another component (e.g., processor 1010). In some embodiments, I/O interface 1030 may include support for devices attached through various types of peripheral buses, such as a variant of the Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) bus standard or the Universal Serial Bus (USB) standard, for example. In some embodiments, the function of I/O interface 1030 may be split into two or more separate components, such as a north bridge and a south bridge, for example. In addition, in some embodiments some or all of the functionality of I/O interface 1030, such as an interface to system memory 1020, may be incorporated directly into processor 1010.

Network interface 1040 may be configured to allow data to be exchanged between computer system 1000 and other devices attached to a network, such as other computer systems, or between nodes of computer system 1000. In various embodiments, network interface 1040 may support communication via wired or wireless general data networks, such as any suitable type of Ethernet network, for example; via telecommunications/telephony networks such as analog voice networks or digital fiber communications networks; via storage area networks such as Fibre Channel SANs, or via any other suitable type of network and/or protocol.

Input/output devices 1050 may, in some embodiments, include one or more display terminals, keyboards, keypads, touchpads, scanning devices, voice or optical recognition devices, or any other devices suitable for entering or retrieving data by one or more computer system 1000. Multiple input/output devices 1050 may be present in computer system 1000 or may be distributed on various nodes of computer system 1000. In some embodiments, similar input/output devices may be separate from computer system 1000 and may interact with one or more nodes of computer system 1000 through a wired or wireless connection, such as over network interface 1040.

As shown in FIG. 9, memory 1020 may include program instructions 1025, configured to implement the various methods and techniques as described herein, and data storage 1035, comprising various data accessible by program instructions 1025. In one embodiment, program instructions 1025 may include software elements of embodiments as described herein and as illustrated in the Figures. Data storage 1035 may include data that may be used in embodiments. In other embodiments, other or different software elements and data may be included.

It is noted that any of the distributed system embodiments described herein, or any of their components, may be implemented as one or more web services. For example, nodes within an identity and access management system may present identity and access management services to clients as network-based services. In some embodiments, a network-based service may be implemented by a software and/or hardware system designed to support interoperable machine-to-machine interaction over a network. A network-based service may have an interface described in a machine-processable format, such as the Web Services Description Language (WSDL). Other systems may interact with the web service in a manner prescribed by the description of the network-based service's interface. For example, the network-based service may define various operations that other systems may invoke, and may define a particular application programming interface (API) to which other systems may be expected to conform when requesting the various operations.

The various methods as illustrated in the FIGS. and described herein represent example embodiments of methods. The methods may be implemented in software, hardware, or a combination thereof. The order of method may be changed, and various elements may be added, reordered, combined, omitted, modified, etc.