Documentation Contents
[Published in the Proceedings of the 15th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, Phoenix, AZ, December 1999]

            USER AUTHENTICATION AND AUTHORIZATION IN THE JAVA(TM) PLATFORM

        Charlie Lai, Li Gong, Larry Koved, Anthony Nadalin, and Roland Schemers

                            charlie.lai,li.gong@sun.com
                            Sun Microsystems, Inc.

                            koved,drsecure@us.ibm.com
                            International Business Machines, Inc.

                            schemers@onebox.com
                            onebox.com

    Abstract

            Java(TM) security technology originally focused on creating a
            safe environment in which to run potentially untrusted code downloaded
            from the public network.  With the latest release of the Java(TM)
            Platform (the Java(TM) 2 Software Development Kit, v 1.2),
            fine-grained access controls can be placed upon critical resources
            with regard to the identity of the running applets and applications,
            which are distinguished by where the code came from and who signed it.
            However, the Java platform still lacks the means to enforce access
            controls based on the identity of the user who runs the code.
            In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of the
            Java(TM) Authentication and Authorization Service (JAAS),
            a framework and programming interface that augments the Java(TM)
            platform with both user-based authentication and access control
            capabilities.

    Introduction

            The Java(TM) technology [8,12] emerged in 1995 with a prominently
            stated goal of providing a safe programming environment.  This means
            that Java security must provide a secure, readily-built platform
            on which to run Java enabled applications.  It also means that
            Java security must provide adequate and extensive security tools and
            services implemented in Java technology that enable independent
            software vendors (ISVs) to build a wider range of security-sensitive
            applications, for example, in the enterprise world.

            The latest release of the Java platform (Java 2) introduces a
            new security architecture [7] that uses a security policy to decide
            the granting of individual access permissions to running code
            (according to the code's characteristics, e.g., where the code is
            coming from and whether it is digitally signed and if so by whom).
            Future attempts to access protected resources will invoke security
            checks that compare the granted permissions with the permissions
            needed for the attempted access.  If the former includes the latter,
            access is permitted; otherwise, access is denied.

            Such a code-centric style of access control is unusual in that
            traditional security measures, most commonly found in sophisticated
            operating systems, are user-centric in that they apply control on the
            basis of who is running an application and not on the basis of which
            application is running.  One major rationale behind code-centric
            access control is that when a user uses a web browser to surf the net
            and runs executable content (e.g., mobile code written in Java) as
            needed, the user variable remains essentially constant.  On the other
            hand, the user may trust one piece of mobile code more than others and
            would like to run this code with more privileges.  Thus it is in fact
            natural to control the security of mobile code in a code-centric
            style.

            Nevertheless, it is obvious that Java is becoming widely used in a
            multi-user environment.  For example, an enterprise application or
            a public Internet terminal must deal with different users, either
            concurrently or sequentially, and must grant these users different
            privileges based on their identities.  The Java Authentication and
            Authorization Service (JAAS) is designed to provide a framework and
            standard programming interface for authenticating users and for
            assigning privileges.  Together with Java 2, an application can
            provide code-centric access control, user-centric access control,
            or a combination of both.

            The rest of the paper is organized as follows.  Sections 2 and 3
            introduce the basic concepts used by JAAS.  Section 4 describes the
            authentication model implemented by JAAS.  Section 5 describes the
            authorization framework for JAAS, and is broken up into several
            subsections.  Section 5.1 defines the JAAS user-based security policy,
            Section 5.2 covers the JAAS access control implementation,
            and Section 5.3 discusses scalability issues regarding the
            security policy.  Section 6 discusses the issue of logging into the
            Java virtual machine.  Section 7 follows with a summary.

    2  Subjects and Principals

            Users often depend on computing services to assist them in performing
            work.  Furthermore services themselves might subsequently interact
            with other services.  JAAS uses the term, subject, to refer to any
            user of a computing service [9,17].  Both users and computing services,
            therefore, represent subjects.  To identify the subjects with which it
            interacts, a computing service typically relies on names.  However,
            subjects might not have the same name for each service and, in fact,
            may even have a different name for each individual service.
            The term, principal, represents a name associated with a
            subject [11,17].  Since subjects may have multiple names
            (potentially one for each service with which it interacts),
            a subject comprises a set of principals.  See Figure 1.

                public interface Principal {
                    public String getName();
                }

                public final class Subject {
                    public Set getPrincipals() { }
                }

                    Figure 1: Subject Class and Principals

            Principals can become associated with a subject upon successful
            authentication to a service.  Authentication represents
            the process by which one subject verifies the identity of another,
            and must be performed in a secure fashion; otherwise a perpetrator may
            impersonate others to gain access to a system.  Authentication
            typically involves the subject demonstrating some form of evidence to
            prove its identity.  Such evidence may be information only the subject
            would likely know or have (a password or fingerprint), or it may be
            information only the subject could produce (signed data using a
            private key).

            A service's reliance on named principals usually derives from
            the fact that it implements a conventional access control model of
            security [10].  This model allows a service to define a set of
            protected resources as well as the conditions under which
            named principals may access those resources.  Recent studies
            (PolicyMaker [4] and SPKI [5]) have focused on the limitations of using
            conventional names in large distributed systems for access control,
            and note that public keys, instead, provide a more practical and
            scalable name representation.  JAAS, and SPKI as well, do not impose
            any restrictions on principal names.  Localized environments that have
            limited namespaces, or that do not rely on public key cryptography,
            may define principals that have conventional names.
            Large-scale distributed systems may use principals that allow
            the principal name to be a public key (encoded as a hex string,
            as in PolicyMaker).

    3  Credentials

            Some services may want to associate other security-related attributes
            and data with a subject in addition to principals.  JAAS refers to
            such generic security-related attributes as credentials.  A credential
            may contain information used to authenticate the subject to new
            services.  Such credentials include passwords, Kerberos tickets [16],
            and public key certificates (X.509 [9], PGP [21], etc.),
            and are used in environments that support single sign-on.
            Credentials might also contain data that simply enables
            the subject to perform certain activities.  Cryptographic keys, for
            example, represent credentials that enable the subject to sign or
            encrypt data.  JAAS credentials may be any type of object.  Therefore,
            existing credential implementations (java.security.cert.Certificate,
            for example) can be easily incorporated into JAAS.  Third-party
            credential implementations may also be plugged into the JAAS
            framework.

            JAAS credential implementations do not necessarily have to contain
            the actual security-related data; they might simply reference the data.
            This occurs when the data must physically reside on a separate server,
            or even possibly in hardware (private keys on a smart card,
            for instance).  Also, JAAS does not impose any restrictions
            regarding credential delegation to third parties.  Rather it allows
            each credential implementation to specify its own delegation protocol
            (as Kerberos does), or leaves delegation decisions up to the
            applications.

            JAAS divides each subject's credentials into two sets.  One set contains
            the subject's public credentials (public key certificates, Kerberos
            tickets, etc).  The second set stores the subject's private credentials
            (private keys, encryption keys, passwords, etc).  To access a subject's
            public credentials, no permissions are required.  However, access
            to a subject's private credential set is security checked.
            See Figure 2.

                public final class Subject {
                    ...
                    public Set getPublicCredentials() { }  // not security checked
                    public Set getPrivateCredentials() { } // security checked
                }

                    Figure 2: Subject Class and Credentials

    4  Pluggable and Stackable Authentication

            Depending on the security parameters of a particular service,
            different kinds of proof may be required for authentication.
            The JAAS authentication framework is based on PAM [18,20],
            and therefore supports an architecture that allows system
            administrators to plug in the appropriate authentication
            services to meet their security requirements.  The architecture
            also enables applications to remain independent from the underlying
            authentication services.  Hence as new authentication services become
            available or as current services are updated, system administrators
            can easily plug them in without having to modify or recompile existing
            applications.

            The JAAS LoginContext class represents a Java implementation of the
            PAM framework.  The LoginContext consults a configuration that
            determines the authentication service, or LoginModule, that gets
            plugged in under that application (See Figure 3).
            The syntax and details of the configuration are defined by PAM.

                public final class LoginContext {
                    public LoginContext(String name) { }
                    public void login() { }         // two phase process
                    public void logout() { }
                    public Subject getSubject() { } // get the authenticated Subject
                }

                public interface LoginModule {
                    boolean login();   // 1st authentication phase
                    boolean commit();  // 2nd authentication phase
                    boolean abort();
                    boolean logout();
                }
                    Figure 3: LoginContext Class and LoginModule Interface

            JAAS, like PAM, supports the notion of stacked LoginModules.
            To guarantee that either all LoginModules succeed or none succeed,
            the LoginContext performs the authentication steps in two phases.
            In the first phase, or the 'login' phase, the LoginContext invokes the
            configured LoginModules and instructs each to attempt the
            authentication only.  If all the necessary LoginModules successfully
            pass this phase, the LoginContext then enters the second phase and
            invokes the configured LoginModules again, instructing each to formally
            'commit' the authentication process.  During this phase each
            LoginModule associates the relevant authenticated principals and
            credentials with the subject.  If either the first phase or the
            second phase fails, the LoginContext invokes the configured
            LoginModules and instructs each to 'abort' the entire authentication
            attempt.  Each LoginModule then cleans up any relevant state they had
            associated with the authentication attempt.

            In addition to JAAS, the Generic Security Services Application
            Programmer's Interface (GSS-API) and Simple Authentication and
            Security Layer Application Programmer's Interface (SASL) [13,14]
            define frameworks that provide support for pluggable authentication.
            However, the GSS and SASL authentication frameworks
            are designed specifically for network communication protocols and,
            as such, provide additional support for securing network communications
            after authentication has completed.  While JAAS does accommodate
            general network-based authentication protocols (including
            Needham-Schroeder and EKE [15,2]) it also focuses on addressing the
            need to support pluggable authentication in stand-alone non-connection
            oriented environments.

    5  Authorization

            Once authentication has successfully completed, JAAS provides
            the ability to enforce access controls upon the principals associated
            with the authenticated subject.  The JAAS principal-based access
            controls (access controls based on who runs code) supplement the
            existing Java 2 codesource-based access controls
            (access controls based on where code came from and who signed it).

    5.1  Principal-Based Access Control

            As stated earlier, services typically implement the access control
            model of security, which defines a set of protected resources,
            as well as the conditions under which named principals
            may access those resources.  JAAS also follows this model,
            and defines a security policy to specify what resources are accessible
            to authorized principals.  The JAAS policy extends the existing
            default Java 2 security policy, and in fact, the two policies, together,
            form a single logical access control policy for the entire Java runtime.

            Figure 4 depicts an example codesource-based policy entry
            currently supported by the default policy provided with Java 2.
            This entry grants code loaded from 'foo.com', and signed by 'foo',
            permission to read all files in the 'cdrom' directory and its
            subdirectories.  Since no principal information is included
            with this policy entry, the code will always be able to read files
            from the 'cdrom' directory, regardless of who executes it.

                // Java 2 codesource-based policy
                grant Codebase "http://foo.com", Signedby "foo" {
                    permission java.io.FilePermission "/cdrom/-", "read";
                }

                    Figure 4: Codesource-Based Policy Entry

            Figure 5 depicts an example principal-based policy entry
            supported by JAAS.  This example entry grants code loaded from
            'bar.com', signed by 'bar', and executed by 'duke',
            permission to read only those files located in the '/cdrom/duke'
            directory.  To be executed by 'duke', the subject affiliated with the
            current access control context (see Section 5.2) must have an associated
            principal of class, 'bar.Principal', whose 'getName' method returns,
            'duke'.  Note that if the code from 'bar.com', signed by 'bar',
            ran stand-alone (it was not executed by 'duke'),
            or if the code was executed by any principal other than 'duke',
            then it would not be granted the FilePermission.
            Also note that if the JAAS policy entry did not specify
            the Codebase or Signedby information, then the entry's FilePermission
            would be granted to any code running as 'duke'.

                // JAAS principal-based policy
                grant Codebase "http://bar.com, Signedby "bar",
                      Principal bar.Principal "duke" {
                    permission java.io.FilePermission "/cdrom/duke/-", "read";
                }

                    Figure 5: Principal-Based Policy Entry

            JAAS treats roles and groups simply as named principals [10].
            Therefore access control can be imposed upon roles and groups just
            as they are with any other type of principal.
            See Figure 6.

                // an administrator role can access user passwords
                grant Principal foo.Role "administrator" {
                    permission java.io.FilePermission "/passwords/-", "read, write";
                }

                // a basketball team (group) can read its directory
                grant Principal foo.Team "SlamDunk" {
                    permission java.io.FilePermission "/teams/SlamDunk/-", "read";
                }

                    Figure 6: Role-Based and Group-Based Policy Entries

            For flexibility, the JAAS policy also permits the
            Principal class specified in a grant entry to
            be a PrincipalComparator (the class implements the PrincipalComparator
            interface).  The permissions for such entries are granted to any subject
            that the PrincipalComparator implies.  See Figure 7.

                public interface PrincipalComparator {
                    boolean implies(Subject subject);
                }

                // regular users can access a temporary working directory
                grant Principal bar.Role "user" {
                    permission java.io.FilePermission "/tmp/-", "read, write";
                }

                    Figure 7: PrincipalComparator Interface and Example Policy Entry

            Figure 7 demonstrates how PrincipalComparators can be used
            to support role hierarchies [19].  In this example
            assume that an administrator role is senior to a user role and, as such,
            administrators inherit all the permissions granted to regular users.
            To accommodate this hierarchy, 'bar.Role' must simply implement
            the PrincipalComparator interface, and its implies method must
            return, true, if the provided subject has an associated
            "administrator" role principal.  Note that although the JAAS policy
            supports role hierarchies via the PrincipalComparator interface,
            administrators are not limited by it.  JAAS can accommodate
            alternative role-based access control mechanisms (such as that deined
            in [6]), as long as the alternative access controls can be expressed
            either through the existing Java 2 policy or the new JAAS policy.

    5.2  Access Control Implementation

            The Java 2 runtime enforces access controls via the
            java.lang.SecurityManager, and is consulted any time untrusted code
            attempts to perform a sensitive operation (accesses to the local file
            system, for example).  To determine whether the code has sufficient
            permissions, the SecurityManager implementation delegates
            responsibility to the java.security.AccessController,
            which first obtains an image of the current AccessControlContext,
            and then ensures that the retrieved AccessControlContext contains
            sufficient permissions for the operation to be permitted.

            JAAS supplements this architecture by providing the method,
            Subject.doAs, to dynamically associate an authenticated subject
            with the current AccessControlContext.  Hence, as subsequent access
            control checks are made, the AccessController can base its decisions
            upon both the executing code itself, and upon the principals
            associated with the subject.  See Figure 8.

                public final class Subject {
                    ...
                    // associate the subject with the current
                    // AccessControlContext and execute the action
                    public static Object doAs(Subject s,
                                    java.security.PrivilegedAction action) { }
                }

                    Figure 8: Subject doAs Method

            To illustrate a usage scenario for the doAs method,
            consider when a service authenticates a remote subject,
            and then performs some work on behalf of that subject.  For security
            reasons, the server should run in an AccessControlContext bound
            by the subject's permissions.  Using JAAS, the server can ensure
            this by preparing the work to be performed as a
            java.security.PrivilegedAction, and then by invoking the doAs method,
            providing both the authenticated subject, as well as the prepared
            PrivilegedAction.  The doAs implementation associates the subject with
            the current AccessControlContext and then executes the action.
            When security checks occur during execution, the Java 2 SecurityManager
            queries the JAAS policy, updates the current AccessControlContext
            with the permissions granted to the subject and the executing
            codesource, and then performs its regular permission checks.
            When the action finally completes, the doAs method simply removes
            the subject from the current AccessControlContext,
            and returns the result back to the caller.

            To associate a subject with the current AccessControlContext,
            the doAs method uses an internal JAAS implementation of the
            java.security.DomainCombiner interface, newly introduced in
            version 1.3 of the Java 2 SDK.  It is through the JAAS DomainCombiner
            that the existing Java 2 SecurityManager can be instructed to query
            the JAAS policy without requiring modifications to the SecurityManager
            itself.  Details of the interaction between the Java 2 SecurityManager
            and DomainCombiners are documented in the javadocs for the
            java.security.DomainCombiner interface.

    Section 5.3  Scalability of the Access Control Policy

            The JAAS principal-based access control policy was intentionally
            designed to be consistent with the existing codesource-based policy
            in the Java 2 platform.  The default policy implementations provided
            with both Java 2 and JAAS reside in a local file, and assume that all
            policy decisions can be defined and made locally.  Obviously,
            this design does not scale beyond small localized environments.
            KeyNote [3] and SPKI both address the limitations of such
            access control designs, and discuss alternative solutions that
            enable the delegation of policy responsibilities to certified
            3rd parties.  By delegating policy-making responsibilities,
            access control policies can easily scale to serve larger systems.

            To improve scalability, both the Java 2 and JAAS file-based policy
            implementations can be replaced with alternative implementations
            that support delegation.  This is achieved by specifying the
            alternative implementations in the 'java.security' properties file
            located in the lib/security subdirectory from where the Java runtime
            environment was installed.  The designs of potential alternative
            implementations are beyond the scope of this paper.

    Section 6  Logging in to the Java Virtual Machine

            With support from the JAAS framework, the Java virtual machine (VM)
            can be augmented to provide a general login facility for users.
            This would enable the VM itself to impose access controls based on who
            logged in.  In fact, [1] investigates and describes the constructs
            necessary to support a multi-user environment within a VM.
            In such an environment, individual users log into the VM and are
            each given an execution shell in which to launch commands and
            applications (similar to UNIX).  The VM imposes access controls
            based on the identity of the user, and special UserPermissions
            may be granted to code running as a particular user to permit access
            to particular resources.

            JAAS can serve as the underlying authentication architecture
            for such a system.  Also, the environment described in [1]
            focuses on user-based authentication and access control from
            the point of view of the Java virtual machine.  The JAAS framework
            supplements this environment by providing the support necessary for
            developers to build the same user-based authentication and
            access control capabilities into their own applications.

    Section 7  Summary and Future Directions

            In this paper, we have outlined the design and implementation of the
            Java(TM) Authentication and Authorization Service (JAAS),
            a framework and programming interface that augments the
            Java(TM) platform with both pluggable authentication and
            principal-based access control capabilities, without requiring
            modifications to the Java 2 core.  Although individual pluggable
            LoginModules can be written in native code, the basic JAAS framework
            can be written entirely in Java.  A prototype implementation of the
            framework has been developed, and is currently packaged as a
            Java 2 standard extension consisting of approximately 25 classes
            partitioned into four packages.

            As Java technology is used to construct not just a single desktop but
            a full-fledged distributed system, a whole new range of distributed
            systems security issues (such as those we touched upon in the
            Introduction chapter) must be tackled.  For example, additional
            mechanisms are needed to make RMI secure in the presence of hostile
            network attacks.  For Jini, service registration and location must be
            securely managed if the environment contains coexisting but
            potentially mutually hostile parties.  There is a full set of
            higher-level concepts and services that must be secured, such
            as transactions for electronic commerce.  There are also many
            lower-level security protocols that we can leverage on, such as
            the network security protocols Kerberos and IPv6.  JAAS is a critical
            building block for all these issues.

    Section 8  Acknowledgements

            We are grateful to Bob Scheifler for his comments and feedback on
            the JAAS architecture.  We also thank Bruce Rich, Kent Soper,
            Anat Sarig, Maryann Hondo, and David Edelsohn for their work in
            helping to define JAAS' functional requirements, and for their
            assistance in testing and documenting JAAS' features.
            Whitfield Diffie, Gary Ellison, Rosanna Lee, Jan Luehe, Peter Neumann,
            Jeff Nisewanger, Jerome Saltzer, Fred Schneider, Michael Schroeder,
            Scott Seligman, and Rob Weltman all contributed to early JAAS designs.
            Maxine Erlund provided management support for the JAAS project.
            Sriramulu Lakkaraju and Narendra Patil wrote product tests for JAAS.
            Scott Hommel helped edit this paper.

    References

       [1]  D. Balfanz and L. Gong.  Experience with Secure Multi-Processing
            in Java.  In Proceedings of ICDCS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, May 1998.

       [2]  S. Bellovin and M. Merritt.  Encrypted Key Exchange: Password-Based
            Protocols Secure Against Dictionary Attacks.  In Proceedings of the
            IEEE Symposium on Research in Security and Privacy, pages 72-84,
            Oakland, California, May 1992.

       [3]  M. Blaze, J. Feigenbaum, and J. Lacy.  Decentralized Trust Management.
            In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Security and Privacy,
            Oakland, California, May 1996.

       [4]  M. Blaze, J. Feigenbaum, and A. Keromytis.  KeyNote: Trust Management
            for Public-Key Infrastructures.  Security Protocols International
            Workshop, England, 1998.

       [5]  C.M. Ellison, B. Frantz, B. Lampson, R. Rivest, B.M. Thomas, and
            T. Ylonen.  SPKI Certificate Theory.  Internet Draft,
            Internet Engineering Task Force, November 1998.

       [6]  L. Giuri and F.U. Bordoni.  Role-Based Access Control in Java.
            In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Role-Based Access Control,
            Fairfax, Virginia, 1998.

       [7]  L. Gong, M. Mueller, H. Prafullchandra, and R. Schemers.
            Going Beyond the Sandbox: An Overview of the New Security Architecture
            in the Java(TM) Development Kit 1.2.  In Proceedings of the USENIX
            Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems, pages 103-112,
            Monterey, California, December 1997.

       [8]  J. Gosling, Bill Joy, and Guy Steele.  The Java Language Specification.
            Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, California, August 1996.

       [9]  R. Housley, W. Ford, T. Polk, and D. Solo.  Internet X.509 Public Key
            Infrastructure Certificate and CRL Profile.  Request for Comments 2459,
            Internet Engineering Task Force, January 1999.

       [10] B. Lampson.  Protection.  ACM Operating Systems Review,
            8(1):18-24, January 1974.

       [11] B. Lampson, M. Abadi, M. Burrows, and E. Wobber.  Authentication in
            Distributed Systems: Theory and Practice.  ACM Transactions on Computer
            Systems, 10(4):265-310, November 1992.

       [12] T. Lindholm and F. Yellin.  The Java Virtual Machine Specification.
            Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, California, 1997.

       [13] J. Linn.  Generic Security Service Application Program Interface,
            Version 2.  Request for Comments 2078, Internet Engineering Task Force,
            January 1997.

       [14] J. Myers.  Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL).
            Request for Comments 2222, Internet Engineering Task Force,
            October 1997.

       [15] R.M. Needham and M.D. Schroeder.  Using Encryption for Authentication
            in Large Networks of Computers.  Communications of the ACM,
            21(12):993-999, December 1978.

       [16] B.C. Neuman and T. Ts'o.  Kerberos: An Authentication Service for
            Computer Networks.  IEEE Communications, 32(9):33-38, September 1994.

       [17] T. Ryutov and B.C. Neuman.  Access Control Framework for Distributed
            Applications.  Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force,
            November 1998.

       [18] V. Samar and C. Lai.  Making Login Services Independent from
            Authentication Technologies.  In Proceedings of the SunSoft
            Developer's Conference, March 1996.

       [19] R.S Sandhu, E.J. Coyne, H.L. Feinstein, and C.E. Youman.  Role-Based
            Access Control Models.  IEEE Computer, 29(2):38-47, February 1996.

       [20] www.opengroup.org.  X/Open Single Sign-On Service (XSSO) - Pluggable
            Authentication.  Preliminary Specification P702, The Open Group,
            June 1997.

       [21] P. Zimmerman.  PGP User's Guide.  MIT Press, Cambridge, 1994.

Copyright © 1993, 2026, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
Contact Us