A Formal Foundation for ODRL

Riccardo Pucella,Vicky Weissman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0601085

2006-01-19

Abstract:ODRL is a popular XML-based language for stating the conditions under which resources can be accessed legitimately. The language is described in English and, as a result, agreements written in ODRL are open to interpretation. To address this problem, we propose a formal semantics for a representative fragment of the language. We use this semantics to determine precisely when a permission is implied by a set of ODRL statements and show that answering such questions is a decidable NP-hard problem. Finally, we define a tractable fragment of ODRL that is also fairly expressive.

Logic in Computer Science,Cryptography and Security

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the interpretive ambiguity caused by the lack of a formal semantic definition in ODRL (Open Digital Rights Language). Specifically, ODRL is an XML - based language used to describe the conditions for legal access to resources. However, since its semantic description uses natural language (English), this makes the protocols written in ODRL prone to different interpretations, which may lead to inconsistent understanding of the protocols among parties.

For example, assume that Alice has two printers, Printer One and Printer Two, and Bob is a potential user. In order to regulate Bob's access to these two printers, Alice and Bob write a protocol in ODRL, which reads: "Bob can use Printer One or Bob can use Printer Two." This protocol clearly allows Bob to use at least one of the printers, but does not clearly indicate which one. If Alice believes that the right of choice is in her hands, while Bob believes that the right of choice is in his hands, then the two parties will have differences in the specific meaning of this protocol. Moreover, since this type of non - explicit stipulation is possible in ODRL, they cannot resolve the dispute through the ODRL specification.

To solve this problem, the author proposes to provide a formal semantics for ODRL and define when a permission (or prohibition) can be derived from a set of ODRL statements. The author also shows that answering such questions is an NP - hard problem and finds an ODRL subset that is both fairly expressive and easy to handle.

### Specific problem summary:
1. **Interpretive ambiguity**: Since the semantic description of ODRL uses natural language, the protocol is prone to different interpretations.
2. **Permission derivation**: A formal method is required to determine when a permission (or prohibition) can be derived from a set of ODRL statements.
3. **Complexity problem**: Answering such questions has been proven to be NP - hard, and an easy - to - handle subset needs to be found.

By introducing formal semantics, the author hopes to reduce the ambiguity in ODRL protocols and improve the consistency and reliability of the protocols.