A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
This application is related to the following patent applications, which are each hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety:
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/780,340, titled “INTEGRATING EXTERNAL DATA IN HUMAN WORKFLOW TASKS”, filed May 14, 2010;
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/780,661, titled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FLEXIBLE CHAINING OF DISTINCT WORKFLOW TASK INSTANCES IN A BUSINESS PROCESS EXECUTION LANGUAGE WORKFLOW”, filed May 14, 2010; now U.S. Pat. No. 9,589,240, issued Mar. 7, 2017;
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/780,348, titled “WORKFLOW TASK ROUTING BASED ON CARDINALITY OF TASK DATA”, filed May 14, 2010;
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/780,214, titled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOGICAL PEOPLE GROUPS”, filed May 14, 2010, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,819,055, issued Aug. 26, 2014; and
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/780,356, titled “DYNAMIC HUMAN WORKFLOW TASK ASSIGNMENT USING BUSINESS RULES”, filed May 14, 2010.
The invention is generally related to workflows and workflow tasks, and particularly to a system and method for providing complex access control in workflows.
Business processes, which may also be referred to as business flows or workflows, provide a level of abstraction above programming languages such as Java or C++, making them easier for non-programmers to use to describe desired processing within a particular business process. Example languages used to define business processes include, for example, the Business Process Execution Language (BPEL), which is an XML-based executable language for specifying orchestration between web services that comprise a business process; Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), and/or BPM.
Business processes are comprised of activities. Each activity defines actions and logic to be executed. Activities can contain other activities, and such activities are referred to herein as container activities. Each container activity includes one or more contained activities which can either be primitive activities (i.e., activities which do not contain any additional activities) or another container activity.
Activities within the business processes can assign tasks to be completed by a user or a group of users before execution of the business process can continue. Access to these tasks can be controlled by Role Based Access Control (RBAC) based on application roles and privileges associated with those application roles.
In traditional RBAC systems, actions are tied to permissions which are then granted to roles to which users and groups belong. However, RBAC provides a coarse-grain access control which is not always adequate to meet user needs or provide customizable solutions to different customers.
A system and method is provided for providing complex access control in workflows. The system comprises a computer, including a computer readable storage medium and processor operating thereon. The system also comprises at least one business process which includes a plurality of tasks. Each task is associated with a task state which changes during execution of the task. The system further comprises a plurality of logical roles. Each logical role defines a responsibility based on the task state and a member of that logical role. Additionally, the system comprises a configurable matrix of access controls that is used to control access to the plurality of tasks based on the plurality of logical roles.
A system and method is provided for providing complex access control in workflows. The system comprises a computer, including a computer readable storage medium and processor operating thereon. The system also comprises at least one business process which includes a plurality of tasks. Each task is associated with a task state which changes during execution of the task. The system further comprises a plurality of logical roles. Each logical role defines a responsibility based on the task state and a member of that logical role. Additionally, the system comprises a configurable matrix of access controls that is used to control access to the plurality of tasks based on the plurality of logical roles.
In accordance with an embodiment, in addition to RBAC, a user's status (also referred to herein as responsibility) relative to a particular task can also be used when determining access rights. For example, the creator of a task can by default have permission to withdraw the task regardless of the application roles to which the creator belongs, based on his status as the task's creator. In RBAC-based systems, a user's status or responsibility for a particular task cannot be considered.
In accordance with an embodiment, default access for a particular status can be customized by the customer. For example, in a particular business process, the creator of a human workflow task can be denied permission to withdraw the human workflow task.
In accordance with an embodiment, configuration of the access controls can be based on external or internal events, or workflow task specific data. For example, approval of a human workflow task can be withheld until task specific data, e.g., documentation indicating that a supervisor has signed off on the task, is attached to the task. Similarly, rejection of a task can be delayed until an event has completed, such as adding a comment detailing the rejection.
In accordance with an embodiment, role based access control (RBAC) can be combined with the status or responsibility of a user of the task as well as a configurable matrix of access controls and responsibilities for the task.
Configurable matrix 210 shows content rules C1-C5 versus roles R1-R5. Each role can be an RBAC role or logical roles related to a user's responsibility or status. Initially, the matrix can be displayed with a default set of access controls which can be configured previously by the user or come standard with the workflow manager. The user can configure access controls using the configurable matrix. As the workflow manager receives each selection 212, the configurable matrix can be updated to reflect the change. Once the user has finished configuring the access controls, access controls for the task are updated based on the selections 214.
In accordance with an embodiment, a user's status or responsibility for a particular task can be determined when the user attempts to perform a particular action. Each status or responsibility is effectively a logical role, for example assignee, owner, reviewer, previous approver, etc. The user's status can be determined based on the state of the task when access is requested and the identity of the user requesting access.
In accordance with an embodiment, the configurable matrix represents access rights that each different status or responsibility has for a given workflow task. A pre-defined matrix, which defines standard or commonly used access rights, can be applied by default. The access controls in the pre-defined matrix can be further restricted or extended and otherwise customized by the user. Additionally, the user can create a custom matrix of access controls to be used by default.
In accordance with an embodiment, each configuration matrix can further specify conditions. Conditions can be dynamically evaluated when each access control is determined. Conditions can be evaluated based on the human workflow task data or determined by external or internal events. Since performance of such access computation can be important, the external systems can compute the conditions asynchronously. In accordance with an embodiment, a workflow task system can call the external system with correlation keys. The external system can set the conditions asynchronously at any time.
In accordance with an embodiment, access controls can be defined both on actions a user can perform on a human workflow task instance, and also on access privileges a user has for attributes of a human workflow task instance. In accordance with an embodiment, results of RBAC are intersected with results of responsibility based access control, to determine the final access privilege.
Although RBAC provides a number of benefits, including that it can be used globally across all human workflow task instances of all types, it provides coarse grain controls. In accordance with an embodiment, applying fine grain access control based on a user's status or responsibility and conditions, in addition to traditional RBAC, can provide access control at both a business process level and also at a human workflow task instance level.
In accordance with an embodiment, access control can be configured by the user and applied to each human workflow task. Access control can also be configured at business process definition level. Access control can also be controlled separately for each instance of a particular human workflow task, thus enabling different instances of a given task to have different access control rules. This approach applies to both actions and attributes of human workflow task instances.
In accordance with an embodiment, conditions can be applied to a responsibility or status, or for a given action, for each instance of a given human workflow task. Condition validations can be performed asynchronously by the human workflow system to negative performance issues during access control computation. Conditions can be created and customized by the user using the human workflow system, these custom conditions can then be applied to given human workflow task instances.
In accordance with an embodiment, access rules can be specified for task content and actions to perform on that content. Access rules can be specified for particular parts of a task that participants can view and update, and can be enforced by the workflow service by applying rules on the task object during the retrieval and update of the task. In accordance with an embodiment, task content access rules and task actions access rules exist independently of one another.
In accordance with an embodiment, access rules can be computed based on several factors. For example, any attribute configured with access rules can decline any permissions for roles not configured against it. For example, if an access rule for a task defines that the payload of that task can be read by assignees, then only assignees have read permissions. No one, including assignees, has write permissions. In accordance with an embodiment, any attribute not configured with access rules has all permissions.
In accordance with an embodiment, if a child attribute is configured with access rules, then any access rules that may exist for the parent are ignored. For example, if a payload message attribute is configured with access rules, then configurations for the payload itself are ignored due to potential conflicts. In this example, the returned map by the API does not contain any entry for the payload. In accordance with an embodiment, write permissions can automatically provide read permissions.
In accordance with an embodiment, if only a subset of message attributes is configured with access rules, other message attributes which are not configured have all permissions. In accordance with an embodiment, comments and attachments have add permissions. Some permissions can be configured for attributes even where the permission does not affect functionality. For example, write permissions on a history attribute do not grant or decline any privileges on the history.
In accordance with an embodiment, the following ‘date’ attributes can be configured using the Human Task Editor. The map returned by the rules service (?) can include one key for each. If the participant does not have read permissions on DATES, the task does not contain any of the following task attributes:
In accordance with an embodiment, the following ‘assignee’ attributes can be configured using the Human Task Editor. The map returned by the rules service can include one key for each of the following. Similarly, if the participant does not have read permissions on ASSIGNEES, the task does not contain any of the following task attributes:
In accordance with an embodiment, Flex fields do not have individual representation in the map returned by the rules service.
In accordance with an embodiment, all message attributes in the map returned by the rules service include a prefix.
In accordance with an embodiment, an application can also create pages to display or not display task attributes based on the access rules. This can be achieved by retrieving a participant's access rules by calling the rules service.
As shown in
As shown in
The present invention can be conveniently implemented using one or more conventional general purpose or specialized digital computer, computing device, machine, or microprocessor, including one or more processors, memory and/or computer readable storage media programmed according to the teachings of the present disclosure. Appropriate software coding can readily be prepared by skilled programmers based on the teachings of the present disclosure, as will be apparent to those skilled in the software art.
In some embodiments, the present invention includes a computer program product which is a storage medium or computer readable medium (media) having instructions stored thereon/in which can be used to program a computer to perform any of the processes of the present invention. The storage medium can include, but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical discs, DVD, CD-ROMs, microdrive, and magneto-optical disks, ROMs, RAMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, DRAMs, VRAMs, flash memory devices, magnetic or optical cards, nanosystems (including molecular memory ICs), or any type of media or device suitable for storing instructions and/or data.
The foregoing description of the present invention has been provided for the purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to the practitioner skilled in the art. In particular, although several of the embodiments described above illustrate the use of the Oracle Human Workflow system, and the use of BPEL, it will be evident that other human workflow or workflow systems, and other flow languages can be used. The embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention and its practical application, thereby enabling others skilled in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments and with various modifications that are suited to the particular use contemplated. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the following claims and their equivalence.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5721913 | Ackroff et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5799297 | Goodridge et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5930512 | Boden | Jul 1999 | A |
5978836 | Ouchi | Nov 1999 | A |
5999911 | Berg | Dec 1999 | A |
6003011 | Sarin et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6026365 | Hayashi | Feb 2000 | A |
6161113 | Mora et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6170002 | Ouchi | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6308224 | Leymann et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6349287 | Hayashi | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6397182 | Cruickshank et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397191 | Notani et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6411314 | Hansen | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6449643 | Hyndman | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6470227 | Rangachari et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6507845 | Cohen et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6519642 | Olsen et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6567783 | Notani et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6574675 | Swenson | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6574736 | Andrews | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584487 | Saboff | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6606740 | Lynn et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6725428 | Pareschi | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6742015 | Bowman-Amuah | May 2004 | B1 |
6792604 | Hickson | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6889231 | Souder et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6895573 | Norgaard | May 2005 | B2 |
6970844 | Bierenbaum | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6988139 | Jervis | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7020697 | Goodman et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7062749 | Cyr et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7080099 | Tada | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7117500 | Pulsipher | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7155720 | Casati | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7236939 | Chen et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7266764 | Flam | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7272816 | Schulz et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7284265 | Choy | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7289966 | Ouchi | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7356611 | Stork | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7370335 | White et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7379945 | Hirsch | May 2008 | B1 |
7403989 | Beringer et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7406432 | Motoyama | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7418475 | Stewart et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428495 | Dhar et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7448046 | Navani et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7464366 | Shukla et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7493593 | Koehler | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7498866 | Choi | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7519711 | Mohindra et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7543292 | Haller et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7603674 | Cyr et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7631291 | Shukla et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7653562 | Schulz | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7676483 | Klug | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7680683 | Hilerio et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7685604 | Baartman et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7702736 | Ouchi | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7774827 | Kinser | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7814142 | Mamou et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7899679 | MacKay | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7925527 | Flam | Apr 2011 | B1 |
7937406 | Shirin | May 2011 | B2 |
8112257 | Weber | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8146083 | Aggarwal et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8170897 | Cohen et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
8250576 | Yildiz | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8321257 | Motoyama | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8417682 | Wilcox | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8793807 | Claussen | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9020831 | Simske | Apr 2015 | B2 |
20020140731 | Subramaniam et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020178119 | Griffin et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020189070 | Noel et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030046576 | High et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030079180 | Cope | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030105974 | Griffin et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030135384 | Nguyen | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154403 | Keinsley | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030158832 | Sijacic et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040230466 | Davis et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040230594 | Flam | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050027585 | Wodtke et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050049924 | DeBettencourt et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071347 | Chau et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050097166 | Patrick et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20060069995 | Thompson et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060074703 | Bhandarkar et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060074734 | Shukla et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060074915 | Bhandarkar et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060150156 | Cyr et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173869 | Byrne et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060218394 | Yang | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060224432 | Li | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060229925 | Chalasani et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060259524 | Horton | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070016465 | Schaad | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070061382 | Davis et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061776 | Ryan | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070156486 | Sanabria et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070203589 | Flinn et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070203881 | Schaad et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239499 | Shukla et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240112 | Haselden et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240231 | Haswarey | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070276715 | Beringer et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080065656 | Theeten et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080114627 | Baeuerie et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114791 | Takatsu | May 2008 | A1 |
20080282250 | Marin | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080301684 | Barros et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080306806 | Van Wyk et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090031418 | Matsuda | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090125366 | Chakraborty et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090164985 | Balko et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090199293 | Song et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090249293 | Davies | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090260021 | Haenel et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090281865 | Stoitsev | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090307162 | Bui et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328205 | Ims | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100049574 | Paul et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100100427 | McKeown et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106546 | Sproule | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100131916 | Prigge | May 2010 | A1 |
20100205013 | Guyan et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100223570 | Gerstl | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100235213 | Channabasavaiah | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100251242 | Sivasubramanian | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110078499 | Fong et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Kuleshov “Human Task Allocation Manager” (2009) Exadel Inc. (http://exadelfs.com/knowledgebase/whitepapers/ExadelFSHuman-Tasks-Allocation-Manager-3-0.pdf). |
Agrawal, Ashish et al., Web Service Human Task (WS—HumanTask), Version 1.0 Active Endpoints, Inc., 2007. |
Agrawal, Ashish et al., WS-BPEL Extension for People (BPEL4People), Version 1.0 Active Endpoints. Inc., 2007. |
Bradshaw, Deanna et al., Oracle BPEL Process Manager Developer's Guide log (1 0.1.3.1 .O) Oracle, Jan. 2007. |
Beecher, Virginia et al., Oracle Fusion Middleware Developer's Guide for Oracle SOA Suite, 1 I g Oracle, Dec. 2009. |
Oracle Database Administrator's Guide 1 I g Oracle, Mar. 2008. |
Oracle BPEL Process Manager—Data Sheet Oracle, 2009. |
Rittman, Mark, Oracle Purchases Collaxa, Launchs Oracle BPEL Processs Manager RittmanMead.com, Jun. 30, 2004. |
Clugage, Kevin et al., The Oracle BPEL Process Manager: BPEL + Human Workflow Oracle, Mar. 14, 2006. |
BPEL4People—wikipedia definition Wikipedia.org, Retrieved Apr. 10, 201 2. |
Kloppman, Matthias et al., WS-BPEL Extension for People—BPEL4People IBM, SAP, White paper, Jul. 2005. |
Collaxa WSOS 2.0: An introduction Collaxa, Sep. 6, 2002. |
Kennedy, Mark, Oracle BPEL Process Manager Quick Start Guide, 1 Og Oracle Sep. 2006. |
Liu, Sa, Business Process Automation and Web Service Choreography Technische Universitat Hamburn-Harburg, Jun. 29, 2004. |
Collaxa—Orchestration Server Developer's Guide Verion 2.0 Beta 2 Collaxa, 2002. |
Kloppman, Matthias et al., WS-BPEL Extension for Sub-Processes—BPEL SPE IBm, SAP, Sep. 2005. |
Oracle International Corporation, Oracle SOA Suite Developer's Guide 10g, 7.12 Creating a Human Workflow Task, 2006, 8 pages. |
Oracle International Corporation, Oracle BPEL Process Manager, Quick Start Guide, 10g, Sep. 2006, 60 pages. |
Oracle International Corporation, Oracle Workflow Developer's Guide, Release 12, Dec. 2006, 508 pages. |
Unknown Author, TrackWise User's Guide, 2000, 180 pages, Sparta Systems, Inc. Hazlet, NJ, USA. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110283281 A1 | Nov 2011 | US |