Abstract:
A network compliance application performs a method of coalescing violation data based on rule and policy violations by retrieving network event data indicative of compliance with a set of policies, in which each of the policies has a set of rules. Policy definition includes a template of rules, definition of rule severity, and a compliance threshold specifying a number of rules of a severity that render the policy non-compliant. The compliance application computes, for each of the policies, violations, each violation indicative of a deviation from a particular rule, and displays a series of views indicative of a plurality of policies in the set of policies, each of the views indicative of violations attributable to each of the policies. From the displayed view, the application receives a detail selection corresponding to a subset of the displayed violations for detailed report display.

Description:
RELATED APPLICATION 
     This Application is a Continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/769,407 entitled “POLICY BASED NETWORK COMPLIANCE” filed on Jun. 27, 2007, the contents and teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND 
     In a configured information network, such as a managed information network , a network fabric, or infrastructure, interconnects network elements, or nodes, for providing various services to end users that are also connected to the network. In a managed information network, for example, a number of storage arrays are adapted to provide data storage and retrieval services. The storage arrays connect to other elements such as switches and hosts to efficiently provide the services to the users. Further, each storage array includes a set of individual storage devices (e.g. disk drives) that are themselves considered network elements. The collection of elements defines a configuration of the information network that is often updated to respond to changes in the network, such as for performance improvements, message traffic redirection, and equipment failures. 
     In a typical information network, the number of interconnected elements can become large, resulting in a substantial number of relationships between the network elements (nodes), the network connections between them, and the application that execute on them. Accordingly, a set of rules may be implemented to identify good or mandatory practices in the network, such as providing a redundant link between critical nodes, or always deploying application A on a node with application B, for example. This set of rules defines a policy that network administrators enforce to maintain the network in a predictable and manageable state. However, identifying and verifying each of the rules across the network may become cumbersome in a large network. Further, the policy including the rules may be driven by external factors, such as corporate directives, security requirements, industry best practices, and Federal compliance laws. Therefore, at any particular site or enterprise, there may be multiple policies to be satisfied, each having a multiplicity of rules in effect. 
     SUMMARY 
     In a managed information network, multiple policies proscribing or requiring network practices may be imposed. These policies specify requirements for connections between nodes (hosts), application dependencies for services provided by the nodes, and configurations of individual nodes. Each policy includes a plurality of rules that identifies network elements, or objects (hosts, services, or connections), a scope of the rule identifying which network objects it applies to, and a desired state to test for satisfaction of the rule. The desired state indicates a condition specifying the state complying with the rule. A passive probe mechanism populates a configuration management database (CMDB) with data concerning network health. A near real time gathering daemon maintains the CMDB in a current state. A policy manager identifies policies in force and the rules included in each, and a violation processor evaluates each rule against the network health data in the CMDB. A display engine receives report requests (queries) from a user, and displays results in a dashboard view that indicates compliance with each policy and with individual rules in each policy. The view presents a graphical user interface (GUI) that provides an overview of policy compliance, and allows dill-down queries to interrogate specific rule violations and severity within particular policies. The GUI depicting the dashboard view output reports are discussed further in copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/769,561, filed Jun. 27, 2007, entitled “NETWORK POLICY ENFORCEMENT DASHBOARD VIEWS”, incorporated herein by reference. 
     Conventional network policy enforcement suffers from the shortcoming that policies are defined in a “black and white” approach that defines policy failure in an overly rigid, nonflexible manner which may cause a minor or non-fatal occurrence to trigger failure of the entire policy. Accordingly, configurations herein substantially overcome the rigid, ungranular nature of conventional policy management by providing a modifiable policy definition mechanism and interface having adaptable scope and rule applicability. Each policy has an independent scope of the network resources it covers, and includes a specified set of rules. Each of the rules likewise has an adjustable scope and severity, such that the relative weight or impact of a particular rule on the overall policy may be appropriately determined. A number of policies may be in force, and for each policy a threshold, or tolerance, of allowable non-compliance instances (i.e. failed rules) is determined. Accordingly, a user or operator fine-tunes the policies to cover a specified group or subnetwork, and within each policy permits a specified number of permitted deviations before triggering non-compliance of the entire policy. 
     Therefore, each of the policies has a flexible scope, modifiable by authorized users as determined by a permission scheme. The scope defines the network resources (typically hosts) that the policy is applied to, and for each policy, the included set of rules applied and the severity of each rule violation (non-compliance) assessed against the threshold of tolerated non-compliances for that severity. For example, a policy might allow only one or two failures of a rule having high severity of non-compliance, but might allow 5 or 10 rule violations of a lesser, more minor non-compliance. Further details on specific rule definition are disclosed in copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/769,499, filed Jun. 27, 2007, entitled “RULE BASED NETWORK RESOURCE COMPLIANCE”, incorporated herein by reference. 
     In further detail, the method of policy-based testing of network resource compliance as disclosed herein includes defining and maintaining a set of policies, such that each policy in the set contains i) a set of rules and corresponding violation criteria for rules within the set of rules, ii) a policy scope that indicates what resources from a network environment the rules in the policy are to be applied, and iii) a policy compliance statement that defines a set of rule violations of varying severity that determine overall policy violation. Policies are defined and maintained via any suitable interface such as the graphical user interface (GUI) discussed below, and the defined polices employed by a compliance manager to gather compliance data from observed network activity, in which the compliance data is indicative of network resources. The violation processor in the compliance manager applies the set of policies and associated sets of rules to the gathered compliance data to calculate compliance results indicating compliance of those network resources represented by the compliance data, and a GUI display engine reports or outputs the compliance results of resources represented in the network resource data. 
     Alternate configurations of the invention include a multiprogramming or multiprocessing computerized device such as a workstation, handheld or laptop computer or dedicated computing device or the like configured with software and/or circuitry (e.g., a processor as summarized above) to process any or all of the method operations disclosed herein as embodiments of the invention. Still other embodiments of the invention include software programs such as a Java™ Virtual Machine and/or an operating system that can operate alone or in conjunction with each other with a multiprocessing computerized device to perform the method embodiment steps and operations summarized above and disclosed in detail below. One such embodiment comprises a computer program product that has a computer-readable storage medium including computer program logic encoded thereon that, when performed in a multiprocessing computerized device having a coupling of a memory and a processor, programs the processor to perform the operations disclosed herein as embodiments of the invention to carry out data access requests. Such arrangements of the invention are typically provided as software, code and/or other data (e.g., data structures) arranged or encoded on a computer readable medium such as an optical medium (e.g., CD-ROM), floppy or hard disk or other medium such as firmware or microcode in one or more ROM or RAM or PROM chips, field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) or as an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). The software or firmware or other such configurations can be installed onto the computerized device (e.g., during operating system or execution environment installation) to cause the computerized device to perform the techniques explained herein as embodiments of the invention. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following description of particular embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention. 
         FIG. 1  is a context diagram of a managed information network environment suitable for use with the present invention; 
         FIG. 2  is a flowchart of policy definition in the environment of  FIG. 1 ; 
         FIG. 3  is an example configuration of a network environment operable for policy definition as in  FIG. 2 ; 
         FIG. 4  is a screen display of selection of a policy from a template in the policy definition of  FIG. 2 ; 
         FIG. 5  is a screen display of selection of policy scope in the definition of  FIG. 2 ; 
         FIG. 6  is a block diagram of policy definition in the environment of  FIG. 3 ; 
         FIGS. 7-9  are a flowchart of screen view processing in the configuration of  FIG. 3 ; 
         FIG. 10  is a screen display of selection of policy compliance thresholds in the definition of  FIG. 6 ; 
         FIG. 11  is a screen display of selection of compliance notifications in the definition of  FIG. 6 ; 
         FIG. 12  is a screen display of selection of policy permissions in the definition of  FIG. 6 ; and 
         FIG. 13  is a screen display of policy review in the definition of  FIG. 6 . 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     In a managed information network, a compliance manager provides rule violation reports that provide an overview of all policies active in a network, and allows a user to drill down to receive specific rule violation reports on pinpointed trouble areas. In the example arrangement, the managed information network may be a storage area network operable to interconnect storage arrays for data storage, retrieval, and recovery services provided to a user community, however the disclosed system is applicable to any suitable managed information network. The rules take the form of policies, or collections of rules, that collectively define the criteria of a compliant network. Each policy, therefore, includes a set of rules. 
     In a large network, therefore, each policy may trigger a potentially enormous number of rule violations. Identification of particular rule violations isolates specific details about areas of concern. Report views of rule violations are discussed further in copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/769,561, filed Jun. _27, 2007, entitled “NETWORK POLICY ENFORCEMENT DASHBOARD VIEWS”. Definition of rules is discussed further in the copending U.S. patent application cited above, both incorporated herein by reference. For example, in a corporate practices policy, a particular rule may check that web servers in human resources and finance running Redhat™ Linux 3 have update 6. Another rule may specify a check that Oracle® servers in NY and San Jose have shared pool size set to no more than 350 GB. 
     Such rules are generally in the form of [object] [scope] and [desired state], or condition for compliance, where the object defines the network object the rule applies to, and scope refines the object set. The objects typically specify hosts (nodes), services (applications) and connections. The condition for compliance then defines the desired state to determine compliance with the rule. Failure to satisfy the desired state constitutes noncompliance with the rule, and a predetermined number of failed rules indicates failure of the policy to which they belong. The rules of a policy are generally selected along a particular theme, such as security, standards compliance, or efficiency. Rules may often be predicated on connections between nodes or applications. A retail organization that uses credit cards may have a policy that there should be no connectivity between payroll server and credit card server, since there is no flow in the normal business model that employs such a connection. If the compliance data indicates such a connection, it indicates a potential data breach. As a further example, the compliance data indicates a count of connections between nodes. Accordingly, the rules may indicate how to identify whether they should be there or not. A security policy might include a rule to check that all client connections from a call center to a credit card authorization system use a secure protocol. An unsecure connection may indicate a vulnerable link, fraud, or unauthorized employee usage. 
       FIG. 1  is a context diagram of a managed information network environment  100  suitable for use with the present invention. Referring to  FIG. 1 , a network compliance manager (compliance manager)  110  is responsive to rule violation occurrences  120  indicative of network health, and operable to generate external notifications  130  concerning compliance with the rules. Each of the rules is part of a policy promoted by a particular corporate, regulatory, or industry for promoting beneficial practices. A network  150  includes a plurality of interconnected nodes  152 , or hosts, collectively operable to establish connections, execute applications, and perform services on behalf of other nodes  152  in the network. A repository  140  includes compliance data  142  having information concerning rule violation occurrences  120 , and is populated by a gathering daemon  113  that passively probes or scans the network  150  for hosts (nodes running an application), services provided by applications, and connections for communication between applications. The rules, or lack of compliance thereof, result in generation of an external notification  130  of non-compliance, depending on the severity of the violation occurrences  120 , discussed in the description and figures that follow. The notifications may take a variety of forms, such as an email  130 - 1 , paper interface  130 - 2  (e.g. trouble ticket), and others  130 - 3 , such as so-called texting or instant messaging (IM) notifications. The compliance manager  110  executes on a server  112  coupled to a console  114  having a GUI  116  to which the compliance manager  110  is responsive for reports of rule compliance. 
       FIG. 2  is a flowchart of policy definition in the environment of  FIG. 1 . Referring to  FIGS. 1 and 2 , at step  200 , the method of policy-based testing of network resource compliance as defined herein includes maintaining a set of policies of network compliance. Each policy in the set contains i) a set of rules and corresponding violation criteria for rules within the set of rules, as shown at step  201 , ii) a policy scope that indicates what resources from a network environment the rules in the policy are to be applied, as depicted at step  202 , and iii) a policy compliance statement that defines a set of rule violations of varying severity that determine overall policy violation, as shown at step  203 . Through data collection and analysis mechanisms discussed further below, the compliance manager  110  gathers or receives the compliance data  142  from observed network activity, in which the compliance data  142  is indicative of network resources, as depicted at step  204 . The compliance manager  110  applies the set of policies and associated sets of rules to the gathered compliance data  142  to calculate compliance results indicating compliance of those network resources represented by the compliance data, as shown at step  205 , and outputting the compliance results of resources represented in the network resource data to a GUI  116  or via external notifications  130  or other messaging mechanisms. 
       FIG. 3  is an example diagram illustrating collection of resource data and use of a compliance manager  110  and related functions according to embodiments herein. As shown, the communication environment  100  includes network  150 , data collection manager  119 , repository  140 , computer system  110 , display screen  116 , compliance manager  110 , and user  108 . 
     As its name suggests, data collection manager  119  collects data (e.g., network resource information) from resources, services, processes, switch applications, etc. operating and/or present in network  150 . Network  150  can include one or more networks of sub-resources having data collected by data collection manager  119 . Data collection manager  119  can be configured to collect information in many different ways. For example, the data collection manager  119  can initiate direct queries to resources in respective network  150 . Queries can include requests for configuration data associated with a queried resource. Responses to queries can include data such as version information associated with a particular application, vendor information, etc. associated with a queried resource. Data collection manager  119  then stores the received information in the repository  140  for application of compliance policies and corresponding rules. 
     Note that the data collection manager  119  can also retrieve information from resources based on indirect queries. For example, the data collection manager  119  can communicate with agents that collect resource data on behalf of the data collection manager  119 . 
     In addition to direct and indirect queries, the data collection manager  119  can also monitor connections or connectivity by monitoring message information transmitted between the network resources present in network  150 . For example, the data collection manager  119  can be configured to analyze the message data transmitted in network  150  and store appropriate information about different monitored connections in the repository  140 . 
     Based on analysis of the message data, the data collection manager  119  can identify different types of information such as a protocol used to support communicates between applications, whether two or more applications communicate via encrypting data, types of information exchanged between the two or more applications, which applications communicate with each other, etc. The compliance manager  110  can apply rules ( 121 ,  FIG. 6  below) to identify whether certain applications are allowed to communicate with each other or whether the applications communicate with each other using a proper protocol as specified by a rule. 
     In a particular configuration, the data collection manager  119  analyzes the collected data and stores the information as objects in a repository  140  (e.g., a database or other storage device). Each object in the repository includes information associated with a respective resource in the network  150 . Storage of the collected information (and/or other derived information) can include classifying the information in one of three classes such as whether the resource information is associated with a host resource, a connection, or service in network  150 . This classification is only example and can be extended to any number of classes, sub-classes, etc. 
     As an example of an embodiments herein, the network  150  can include resources such as clients, servers, switches, storage devices, host resource, connections supporting communications between computer systems, services, etc. in network  150 . A network resource such as a client resource (e.g., a computer system) can be classified as a host resource. The computer system server  112  can support a number of applications such as an operating systems, text editor applications, e-mail applications, etc. Upon collection of data associated with the sub-resources (e.g., operating system, text editors applications, etc.), the data collection manager stores  120  stores the information in objects. Each object (e.g., representing a resource or sub-resource) in the repository  140  includes information about the resource such as software version information, vendor information, computer system on which the application operates, etc. 
     In one embodiment, the data collection manager  119  stores the information in the repository  140  as a hierarchical tree of information. Pointers associated with the objects indicate how the objects are related to each other. 
     Via retrieval of resource data in repository  140 , the compliance manager  110  applies policies and corresponding rules to verify compliancy. Retrieval can be achieved via queries (e.g., SQL queries) applied to repository  140 . 
     As will be discussed later in this specification, via a graphical user interface on display screen  116 , the compliance manager  110  enables a respective user to create policies and corresponding rules to verify compliance with respect to resource configurations (e.g., based on information stored in repository  140  from the direct and indirect queries) as well verify compliance with respect to two or more resources that communicate with each other over network  150  (e.g., based on message information transmitted between resources). 
     Accordingly, a particular configuration disclosed herein includes applying a rule to a repository of message data (passively or actively) collected from multiple application resources communicating with each other over the network  150 . Based on a comparison of compliance conditions (i.e. test of the desired state portion of a rule) to portions of the repository of message data as specified by the rule scope definition, the compliance manager  110  identifies or determines compliancy with respect to the communicating application resources. 
     As mentioned above, the resource data can include configuration information associated with the resources in network  150 . Based on application of rules to the repository of data, the compliance manager  110  is able to identify compliancy with respect to corresponding configurations of the application resources. 
       FIG. 4  is a screen display of selection of a policy from a template in the definition of  FIG. 4 . Shown in  FIG. 4  is an example screenshot  200  illustrating a graphical user interface  250  as generated by compliance manager  110  for display on display screen  116  according to embodiments herein. As shown, graphical user interface  250  enables management of compliance policies. Menu  210  of graphical user interface  250  enables a respective network administrator to create compliance policies and corresponding rules using a step-by-step process. For example, to create a new compliance policy, the user can select entry  208  from multiple policy templates in menu  210  that represent existing policies. The compliance manager  110  displays summary details associated with the selected compliance policy in viewing region  260 . Upon selection of “next” symbol  275 , the compliance manager  110  initiates display of the screenshot  300  as shown in  FIG. 5 . 
       FIG. 5  is a screen display  300  of selection of policy scope in the definition of  FIG. 4 . Shown in  FIG. 5  is an example screenshot  300  illustrating a graphical user interface  250  enabling a user to name a compliance policy and select a scope for applying the compliance policy according to embodiments herein. For example, screenshot  300  illustrates details associated with the selected compliance policy template as in screenshot  200 . To cerate a new compliance policy, the user  108  renames the compliance policy via input with respect to display field  352 . The user  108  is able to provide a description of the compliance policy via input with respect to display field  354 . The user identifies a scope of resources in network  150  to which the compliance policy applies via input with respect to display fields  356 . As shown, the compliance policy scope can be defined as a group of resources in a geographic region, a range of network addresses, etc. 
     Based on the policy scope selection, the compliance manager  110  initiates display of compliance policy coverage information in display field  358  to notify the user of different resources (e.g., hosts, services, connections, etc.) to which the compliance policy applies, prior to completing definition of the policy. Upon selection of “next” symbol  375 , the compliance manager  110  initiates display of a rule specification, as disclosed in the copending application cited above. 
       FIG. 6  is a block diagram of policy definition in the network environment  100  operable according to the flowchart of  FIG. 2 . Referring to  FIGS. 1 ,  3  and  6 , the compliance manager  110  includes a violation processor  160 , a policy manager  162 , and a display engine  164 . The compliance data  142  in the repository  140  includes network events  144 , policy and rule data  146 , and violation data  148 . The policy and rule data  146  includes applicable policies  147 - 1  . . .  147 -N ( 147  generally), each including a set of rules  121 - 1  . . .  121 -N ( 121  generally). Development and management of the policies  147  and rules  121  is discussed further in the copending applications cited above. In operation, the violation processor  160  receives network events  144  and compares them to rules  121  in the policy and rule data  146  for computing rule violations  120 . The network events  144  remain current via the gathering daemon  113  coupled to the network. The repository stores the rule violations  120  as violation data  148  for access by the display engine  164 . The display engine  164  drives the GUI  116  screens for policy definition, discussed further below, and is also responsive to report requests  115  for compliance reports. The policy manager  162  identifies, for requested policies, which rules  121  belong to particular policies  147 , the violation occurrences  120  corresponding to those rules, and overall compliance for each of the policies  147 . 
       FIGS. 7-9  are a flowchart of policy definition screen processing in the configuration of  FIG. 3 , and according to the block diagram of  FIG. 6 . Referring to FIGS.  3  and  6 - 9 , the method of policy-based testing of network resource compliance as disclosed herein includes maintaining a set of policies  146 , each  147  policy in the set containing a set of rules  121  and corresponding violation criteria for rules within the set of rules, as depicted at step  300 . Defining the policy further includes presenting a set of predetermined policy templates  149  in a template window  262 , the templates including an exemplary set of initial rules, as shown at step  301 . As depicted above in  FIG. 4 , the policy templates  149  are predetermined sets of rules based on governmental regulations, corporate guidelines, and/or industry best practices. The selected template is then adapted to be customized to suit the needs of the particular network, as now discussed further. The display engine  164  receives a selection of one of the templates  149  and included rules  121 , such that the rules  121  are operable to receive subsequent modification, as disclosed at step  302 . 
     The selected template defines a policy  147  for inclusion in the set of policies  146 , each policy including a set of rules, each rule identifying an object, scope and desired state applicable to test a particular subset of network resources. As discussed further in the copending application cited above, each of the rules in the policy has a rule scope, such that the rule scope is indicative of a subset of network resources that the rule is applicable to, as shown at step  303 . During rule definition, the compliance manager  110  calculates rule applicability in real time before finish defining of policy, as shown at step  304 , and the display engine  164  displays results to a user  108  so that the user can evaluate what resource the rule will be applied to, as shown at step  305 . 
     Prior to customizing the rules in this manner, however, the compliance manger  110  receives the policy scope that indicates what resources from a network environment the rules  121  in the policy  147  are to be applied, as shown at step  306 . The policy scope identifies the network resources that the policy applies to, in which the network resources include hosts, services and connections the hosts operable to execute applications, the services provided by the applications, and the connections operable to communicate between the applications such that the gathered compliance data reflects operation of the resources, as depicted at step  307 . 
     An example group defines a set of hosts, or nodes  152 , and hence is identifiable by the network location of the nodes. As shown in  FIG. 5 , in the scope window  356 , the user defines a policy scope indicative of the set of network resources the policy is applicable to, as shown in step  308 . The selected policy scope includes at least one of a group of hosts in the network, as shown at step  309 , or a subrange of IP addresses of applicable hosts, as depicted at step  310 . When the policy  147  is applied, the violation processor  160  applies each of the rules  121  in the policy  147  to each of the hosts  152  (resources) defined in the policy scope. 
     Policy definition also includes a policy compliance statement that defines a set of rule violations of varying severity that determine overall policy violation, as shown at step  311 . As shown in  FIG. 10  below, from the menu  210  selection  212 , compliance manager  110  receives a user definition for the threshold for each policy  147 , such that the threshold defines a number of rules  121  of each severity that constitute a failure of the policy  147 , in which each threshold is independent of the threshold of other policies (i.e. has its own threshold values or scores). Conventional policy management employs a black and white approach in which a single failure of arbitrary magnitude can render noncompliance with respect to the entire policy. The compliance statement definition disclosed herein provides definition of individual policy criteria specifying policy noncompliance. Noncompliance can be defined as a threshold number of noncompliant instances of a particular severity, or according to a sliding scale that weighs the severity of individual rule violations. Accordingly, setting the compliance statement includes specifying, for each policy, a severity based threshold or a sliding score, as depicted at step  313 . Following the check at step  313 , in the case of severity thresholds, the compliance manager  110  defines or establishes a range of severity levels, each of the rules having a severity level, as disclosed at step  314 , and shown in severity tolerances  502  in  FIG. 10 . The user then identifies, for each severity level, a threshold value  504  indicative of a number of violations defining failure of a particular policy  147 , as depicted at step  315 . Therefore, for each of the severity levels (high, medium and low in the example configuration, although any suitable number of tiers may be used), a user enters a compliance threshold value  504 . The compliance threshold value specifies the number of violations (non-compliances) of each severity level that will be tolerated until the policy fails (is found non-compliant). Typically, fewer violations of a more severe threshold are to be tolerated, while more of a minor threshold would be required to trigger entire policy failure. Since the compliance threshold values of each severity level are independently set for each policy  147 , each policy is tunable to be as conservative or as accommodating as the network situation dictates. 
     Alternatively, from step  313 , a user may select a sliding severity score for policy violation, as depicted at step  316 . The compliance manager receives, for each severity level, a score value, as shown at step  317 , and defines, for a particular policy, a compliance score value, as depicted at step  318 . The score value for the severity of a violation are added, and compliance is satisfied if the failure score is less than the compliance score value for the policy. Thus, the violation processor  160  aggregates, for each of the rule violations  120 , the score values corresponding to the severity level of the violated rule  121 , as disclosed at step  319 , and determines noncompliance of the policy  147  if the aggregate score value for each rule violation exceeds the compliance score value defined for the policy  147 , as depicted at step  320 . 
     Continuing from the policy and rule menu  210 , once the policy rules are defined, according to the mechanism outlined in the copending patent application referenced above, the compliance manager  110  sets external notifications  130 , shown in the notifications screen display  510 , discussed below, and defines permission levels  216  through owner roles indicative of access to modify each of the policies, as shown at step  321 . Permission to access a policy is set by sharing a policy with other owner roles who are also authorized to access the policy. Each policy has an owner role. Only users from the same owner role can share that policy with other users that are from other roles. Referring also to  FIG. 12 , for the selected policy  522 , the user defines a set of authorized roles  524  paralleling users of the compliance manager  110 . For each user role  524 , the compliance manager  110  receives a selection to assigning an owner role indicative of a permission level to users, such that the owner role defines the ability of a user to assign particular rules to particular policies, as depicted at step  322 , by selecting an option to view  526  and to modify  528  the policy that are selectable in checkoff buttons. 
     Following definition of the policies  147  and rules  121  therein, the compliance manager  110  pursues the ongoing task of gathering the compliance data  142  from observed network activity such that the compliance data  142  is indicative of network resources (network events  144 ), as disclosed at step  323 . The violation processor  180  applies the set of policies  147 -N and associated sets of rules  121 -N to the gathered compliance data  142  to calculate compliance results in the form of violation data  148  indicating compliance of those network resources represented by the compliance data,  142 , depicted at step  324 . Responsive to report requests  115  and requested external notifications  130 , the display manager outputs the compliance results of resources represented in the network resource data  144 , as discussed in the copending patent application cited above. 
     The remaining screen displays for policy definition referenced above are now discussed in further detail.  FIG. 10  is a screen display  500  of selection of policy compliance thresholds in the definition of  FIG. 6 . In  FIG. 10 , the user selects a threshold number  504  of violations  120  for each of the severity levels  502  defined for the policy  147 , typically high, medium and low. For each of the severity levels  502 , the user specifies a threshold (number)  504  of violations  120 , which, if exceeded, will cause the policy to be deemed non-compliant. A collective “catch all” allows specification of a number of violations of any level triggering non-compliance, and a user is required to specify at least one severity threshold (such as a maximum number of high severity occurrences). Also, as discussed above, as an alternative configuration, a sliding score option may also be provided that allows a point value for each severity label, and an aggregate point limit defining overall policy non-compliance. 
       FIG. 11  is a screen display  510  of selection of compliance notifications  130  in the definition of  FIG. 6 . In addition to direct report requests  115  from the GUI  116 , automated notifications are selectable for alerting system managers and others of compliance violations. A blanket selection  512  of a destination email for policy noncompliance allows email notification to a responsible party for overall policy non-compliance. A more refined selection  514  of non-compliant rules allows an email destination for notification of violations of a threshold number  516  of a particular severity, similar to the non-compliance thresholds  504  of  FIG. 10 . 
       FIG. 12  is a screen display  520  of selection of policy permissions in the definition of  FIG. 6 . From menu  210  selection  216 , the user selects authorized roles  524 , along with view permissions  526  and modify permissions  528 , as outlined above. The illustrated checkoff boxes  526 ,  528  privilege scheme may be augmented with more granular of hierarchical authorization and/or authentication mechanism in alternative configurations, however. 
       FIG. 13  is a screen display  530  of policy review in the definition of  FIG. 6 . From menu  210  selection  218 , a policy review window  530  recapitulates the selected attributes  532  of the policy just defined, as well as the rules  534  included in that policy prior to storing and deploying the policy. 
     Those skilled in the art should readily appreciate that the programs and methods for managing network policies as defined herein are deliverable to a processing device in many forms, including but not limited to a) information permanently stored on non-writeable storage media such as ROM devices, b) information alterably stored on writeable storage media such as floppy disks, magnetic tapes, CDs, RAM devices, and other magnetic and optical media, or c) information conveyed to a computer through communication media, for example using baseband signaling or broadband signaling techniques, as in an electronic network such as the Internet or telephone modem lines. Such delivery may be in the form of a computer program product having a computer readable medium operable to store computer program logic embodied in computer program code encoded thereon, for example. The operations and methods may be implemented in a software executable object or as a set of instructions embedded in an addressable memory element. Alternatively, the operations and methods disclosed herein may be embodied in whole or in part using hardware components, such as Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), state machines, controllers or other hardware components or devices, or a combination of hardware, software, and firmware components. 
     While the system and method for managing network policies has been particularly shown and described with references to embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims.