DZone
Thanks for visiting DZone today,
Edit Profile
  • Manage Email Subscriptions
  • How to Post to DZone
  • Article Submission Guidelines
Sign Out View Profile
  • Post an Article
  • Manage My Drafts
Newsletter
Log In / Join
Refcards Trend Reports
Events Video Library
Refcards
Trend Reports

Events

View Events Video Library

Related

  • JSON-Based Serialized LOB Pattern
  • Extracting Data From Very Large XML Files With X-definition
  • What Is Ant, Really?
  • Redis-Based Tomcat Session Management

Trending

  • YAGNI in the Age of AI Coding
  • Data Integration Landscape 2026: Event Streaming, API, and Batch in the Era of Agentic AI
  • How to Keep AI Agents From Going Rogue Using Docker Sandbox
  • Architecture Review Boards for Generative AI: A Framework for Governance, Risk Management, and Responsible Adoption

Draft This article hasn't been published, so readers can't see it.

In moderation This article is waiting for review, so readers can't see it yet.

Deleted This article has been deleted, so readers can't see it.

  1. DZone
  2. Data Engineering
  3. Databases
  4. An Attribute-Based Access Control Plan That Won't Affect Database Performance

An Attribute-Based Access Control Plan That Won't Affect Database Performance

Your databases are deployed on an SSD-backed infrastructure for fast performance, and direct patches to Amazon EC2 ensure the lowest latency available.

By 
Darren Perucci
·
May. 28, 17 · Opinion
Post on X (opens in a new tab) Share on LinkedIn (opens in a new tab)
8.4K Views

Join the DZone community Save articles, join the discussion, and download Refcards and Trend Reports with a free account.

Join for free Already a member? Log in

Basing data access rights on the attributes of users, data, resources, and environments helps keep your data safe from thieves by preventing nearly all brute-force access attempts. However, applying attribute-based access controls to existing database systems requires careful consideration of potential performance bottlenecks you may be creating.

Attribute-based access controls (ABAC) for databases tend to be as simple or complex as the organization using them. For a 40-person office, it isn't particularly difficult to establish the roles, policies, rules, and relationships you'll use to determine users' data access rights.

For example, to ensure that only managers in the finance department have access to the company's financial data, create Role=Manager and Department=Finance. Then, require these attributes in the permissions of any user who requests financial data.

As you can imagine, access controls are rarely that simple. When creating enterprise-wide ABACs, an attribute management platform and machine-enforced policies may be required. IT Business Edge's Guide to Attribute Based Access Control (ABAC) Definition and Considerations (registration required) outlines the major components of such an attribute management system:

  • Enterprise policy development and distribution.
  • Enterprise identity and subject attributes.
  • Subject attribute sharing.
  • Enterprise object attributes.
  • Authentication.
  • Access control mechanism deployment and distribution.

The Nuts and Bolts of Policy-Based Access Controls

ABAC policies are established using the eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML). As explained by ABAC vendor Axiomatics, attributes are assigned to subjects, actions, resources, and environments. By evaluating the attributes in conjunction with the rules of your policies, access to the data or resource is allowed or denied.

ABAC applies rules to access requests based on the attributes and policies you establish for subjects, environments, resources, and actions. Source: Axiomatics.

Applying an ABAC system to existing RDBMSs can be problematic, as exemplified in a post from March 2014 on the Stack Exchange Information Security forum. In particular, what effect will implementing fine-grain access have on database performance? And can existing Policy Enforcement Points (PEPs) implement XACML?

Axiomatics' David Brossard replies that performance is most affected by the PEP-to-PDP (Policy Decision Point) communication link and the PDP-to-PIP (Policy Information Point) link. In particular, how you expose the authorization service PDP helps determine performance: if exposed as a SOAP service, you invite SOAP latency, and if exposed via Apache Thrift or another binary protocol, you'll likely realize better performance.

Brossard identifies six areas where ABAC performance can be enhanced:

  1. How policies are loaded into memory.
  2. How policies are evaluated.
  3. How attribute values are fetched from PIPs.
  4. How authorization decisions are cached by PEPs.
  5. How authorization requests are bundled to reduce roundtrips between the PEP and PDP.
  6. How the PEP and PDP communicate.

Six potential performance bottlenecks in a typical ABAC implementation. Source: Stack Exchange Information Security.

Database Attribute (computing)

Published at DZone with permission of Darren Perucci. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

Related

  • JSON-Based Serialized LOB Pattern
  • Extracting Data From Very Large XML Files With X-definition
  • What Is Ant, Really?
  • Redis-Based Tomcat Session Management

Partner Resources

×

Comments

Loading comments

The comments didn't load

Please try again in a moment.

Likes

Loading

The next likes didn't load. Please try again.

The likes didn't load

Please try again in a moment.

See who liked this

Log in or join DZone for free to see who liked this article.

Log in Join for free
  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook

ABOUT US

  • About DZone
  • Support and feedback
  • Community research

ADVERTISE

  • Advertise with DZone

CONTRIBUTE ON DZONE

  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Become a Contributor
  • Core Program
  • Visit the Writers' Zone

LEGAL

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy

CONTACT US

  • 3343 Perimeter Hill Drive
  • Suite 215
  • Nashville, TN 37211
  • [email protected]

Let's be friends:

  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook