Decentralized Policy Management via Semantic Relationships

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing systems face challenges in managing and enforcing policies across loosely-coupled distributed systems with heterogeneous and evolving resources, as they often rely on centralized associations that fail to adapt to complex semantic relationships and dynamic changes.

Innovation Solution

A decentralized system that associates policies with entities based on complex, semantic relationships, allowing for indirect policy application through relationships like 'connectedTo' and 'contains,' enabling dynamic identification and enforcement of policies across disparate systems.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If policies are associated directly with entities in centralized systems, then policy management is simple and straightforward, but the system cannot adapt to complex semantic relationships and dynamic changes in distributed systems

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to complex semantic relationshipsVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the centralized policy management system into decentralized components distributed across multiple systems. Each system maintains its own policy associations locally, while a semantic relationship framework enables cross-system policy propagation. This segmentation allows adaptation to complex relationships without requiring a monolithic complex system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces semantic relationship models and policy propagation mechanisms as intermediaries between entities and policies in distributed systems. These intermediaries translate and map policies across different systems based on semantic relationships, enabling adaptability without direct complex associations between all entities and all policies.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Adaptability or versatility

If centralized policy associations are used, then policy enforcement is consistent across the system, but the system fails to adapt to evolving resources and dynamic changes in distributed environments

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to evolving resourcesVSAvoidpolicy enforcement consistency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic policy propagation mechanisms that automatically update policy associations when semantic relationships change or new entities are added to the distributed system. This dynamic approach maintains policy enforcement consistency across evolving resources without requiring manual reconfiguration of centralized associations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms where policy propagation results and relationship changes are monitored and used to automatically adjust policy associations across the distributed system. This feedback loop ensures that policy enforcement remains consistent even as the system evolves and new entities are introduced.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Adaptability or versatility

If direct policy-entity associations are implemented, then the system structure is simple, but it cannot handle indirect policy application through semantic relationships like 'connectedTo' and 'contains'

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecapability to handle semantic relationshipsVSAvoidpolicy management complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements nested policy propagation where policies can be associated with entities directly and indirectly through multiple levels of semantic relationships. The system traverses relationship graphs to propagate policies through nested structures (e.g., entity contains component, component connectedTo system), enabling indirect policy application without requiring direct associations for every entity pair.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent adds a semantic relationship dimension to the traditional flat policy-entity association model. By introducing relationship types (connectedTo, contains, etc.) as an additional dimension, the system can handle indirect policy application through semantic relationships while maintaining a manageable structure through formal relationship definitions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

4Adaptability or versatility

If decentralized policy management is implemented, then the system can adapt to distributed environments, but integrating and correlating information from diverse domains becomes challenging

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to distributed systemsVSAvoidinformation integration capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a universal semantic relationship framework that can represent and integrate diverse domain-specific relationships in a unified manner. This universal model enables information correlation across distributed systems by providing a common language for expressing relationships, preventing information loss during integration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS8095959B2Method and system for integrating policies across systems
Publication Date: 2012.01.10 HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEV LP
  • US8095959B2 patent drawing
  • US8095959B2 patent drawing
  • US8095959B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The disclosed embodiments relate to a system and method of applying policies. The method may include identifying a first entity and a first relationship, the first relationship defining an attribute related to the first entity. Additionally, the method may include identifying a policy associated with the first entity and the first relationship and applying semantics to determine a degree of relatedness between the first entity and a second entity. Further, the method may include applying the policy to a second relationship that defines an attribute related to the second entity if the degree of relatedness between the entity and the second entity is within a range of values.