Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Security and Privacy Policy Languages: A Survey, Categorization and Gap Identification

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1512.00201 v1 pith:LUUFHZCO submitted 2015-12-01 cs.CR

classification cs.CR
keywords languagespolicyprivacysecuritycategorizationframeworkadoptionbeen
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

For security and privacy management and enforcement purposes, various policy languages have been presented. We give an overview on 27 security and privacy policy languages and present a categorization framework for policy languages. We show how the current policy languages are represented in the framework and summarize our interpretation. We show up identified gaps and motivate for the adoption of policy languages for the specification of privacy-utility trade-off policies.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SoK: Three Facets of Privacy Policies

    cs.CY 2019-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A systematic review of privacy policies shows that natural language, graphical, and machine-readable forms each serve one community, and no single form can be simultaneously legal, understandable, and enforceable.

  2. 120 Domain-Specific Languages for Security

    cs.CR 2024-08 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    Systematic literature review of 120 security DSLs reveals high fragmentation with opportunities for integration and gaps in usability and evaluation.

Pith tools