Attribute-based access control (ABAC), also referred to as policy-based access control (PBAC) or claims-based access control (CBAC), is an authorization methodology that sets and enforces policies based on characteristics, such as department, location, manager, and time of day. Using Boolean logic, ABAC creates access rules with if-then statements that define the user, request, resource, and action. For example, if the requester is a salesperson, they are granted read-write access to the customer relationship management (CRM) solution, as opposed to an administrator who is only granted view privileges to create a report.
With account-based access control, dynamic, context-aware security can be provided to meet increasingly complex IT requirements. Use cases for ABAC include:
- Protecting data, network devices, cloud services, and IT resources from unauthorized users or actions
- Securing microservices / application programming interfaces (APIs) to prevent exposure of sensitive transactions
- Enabling dynamic network firewall controls by allowing policy decisions to be made on a per-user basis
Components of ABAC
Attributes are the characteristics or values of components that are used in an access event. These attributes can be drawn from several data sources, including identity and access management (IAM) systems, enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, employee information from an internal human resources system, customer information from a CRM, and lightweight directory access protocol (LDAP) servers.
Attribute-based access control allows the use of multiple attributes for authorization to provide a more granular approach to access control, for example, separation of duties (SoD).
Characteristics that can be used when making a determination to grant or deny access include the following.
- Subject or user attributes—identifying criteria that describe who is attempting to obtain access to a resource to perform an action
- Object or resource attributes—encompass characteristics of an object or resource (e.g., file, application, server, API) that has received a request for access
- Environmental or context attributes—indicate the broader context of access requests.
- Action attributes—indicate how a user wants to engage with a resource, and can be used individually or in combination for more complex scenarios
| Subject or user attributes | Object or resource attributes | Environmental or context attributes | Action attributes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clearance, Department, Employee ID, Job title, Username | Author/owner, Classification, Date created, Last updated, Type | Current day, Current time, Device location, Time zone | Delete, Read, Transfer, View, Write |
How attribute-based access control works
ABAC grants permissions according to who a user is rather than what they do, which allows for granular controls. Attributes are analyzed to assess how they interact in an environment; then, rules are enforced based on relationships.
Here is how the process typically works:
- An access request is made.
- The attribute-based access control tool scans attributes to determine if they match existing policies.
- Based on the result of the ABAC tool’s analysis, permission is granted or denied.
Implementing attribute-based access control: policies, systems, and infrastructure
ABAC controls access by evaluating dynamic attributes about the subject, resource, action, and environment. The main implementation steps are:
Define policy goals and attributes
- Define objectives and scope, including which systems, data classes, and business processes ABAC will protect.
- Set risk-based priorities by triaging high-risk data and processes for immediate ABAC coverage.
- Standardize attribute names, types, and vocabularies (e.g., subject.role, subject.clearance, resource.sensitivity, and env.device_posture) and publish them in an attribute catalog.
Design policies
- Keep policies intent-driven and map them to business assertions.
- Document the business purpose, risk mitigated, and related compliance requirements.
- Minimize attributes per policy (usually start with two to four high-value attributes per rule).
- Create templates for common patterns (e.g., read-only access, admin actions, cross-tenant support, and emergency access).
- Use fail-safe defaults (e.g., deny by default and have explicit allow rules).
- Include machine-readable obligations (e.g., require multi-factor authentication (MFA) or record session) and human-readable guidance for enforcement decisions.
Define attributes
Examples of common attributes include:
- Subject attributes—userId, role, groups, department, clearance, employmentStatus, authn_strength, riskScore.
- Resource attributes—resourceId, resourceType, owner, sensitivity/classification, tenantId, createdBy.
- Action attributes—action (read/write/execute/approve), channel (API/console/GUI), transactionAmount.
- Environment attributes—time, geo, device_posture, ip_reputation, network_zone, threatLevel.
- Input/context attributes—transaction-specific values (order amount, account number), ticket IDs, consent flags, IRB status.
- Attribute sourcing—IDaaS (identity as a service), HRIS (human resources information system), CMDB (configuration management database), device posture agents, fraud engine, partner systems, and tenant metadata.
Build policy governance and authoring processes
- Creating a policy council.
- Assign policy owners.
- Develop a policy lifecycle.
- Establish change control processes.
- Maintain a policy registry with version history and reviewers.
Deploy a policy architecture
- Create a policy architecture that includes a policy administration point (PAP), a policy decision point (PDP), a policy enforcement point (PEP), and a policy information point.
- Integrate policy architecture with attribute sources.
- Synchronize all elements.
- Ensure proper policy distribution to avoid latency.
Testing
- Unit test new policies and every policy change.
- Simulate policies in action by running a replay of real access logs against new policies.
- Deploy policies to staging and then to a subset of users and applications before full rollout.
- Run penetration and red-team testing to evaluate bypass scenarios (e.g., attribute spoofing, caching attacks, and replay).
Logging
- Record and store decision logs (e.g., log decision ID, policy version, all attribute values used, requestor, resource, timestamp, PDP verdict, and obligations).
- Store logs in tamper-evident storage (e.g., WORM or immutable S3 + KMS) for forensic evidence and auditors.
- Enable auditors to trace a decision from policy to attribute values to enforcement action (e.g., link decision ID to evidence artifacts).
- Automate alerts and analytics, forwarding logged anomalies, high-failure rates, and unusual conditional allows to SIEM (security information and event management) or UEBA (user and entity behavior analytics) systems for detection.
Pilot rollout
- Conduct a pilot using one or two high-value applications and implement the PEP and PDP with three to five policies.
- Run the system in monitor-only mode, logging decisions for two to six weeks to refine attributes and rules.
- Implement enforcements gradually, starting with soft enforcement of advisory obligations (e.g., requiring justification) and then moving to full enforcement of deny or permit and enable obligations.
Full-scale rollout
- Onboard business units.
- Add more applications.
- Automate attribute pipelines.
Operations and maintenance
- Use a policy lifecycle management program.
- Define attribute owners and service level agreements (SLAs) for freshness and correctness.
- Monitor performance and SLAs.
- Follow incident response playbooks to revoke attributes, rotate tokens, and push emergency policy.
- Conduct user training, such as running policy-writing workshops for application owners and training the helpdesk on ABAC outcomes.
- Continuously improve by running quarterly reviews and pruning policies.
Actionable ABAC implementation checklist
This quick checklist summarizes the ABAC implementation process to provide an overview of the scope and scale of the project.
o Define initial use cases and scope (usually one or two applications).
o Establish policy governance (e.g., policy owners and reviewers).
o Create an attribute catalog and assign owners and SLAs.
o Deploy decision points and enforcement points for a pilot app.
o Implement policy connectors for IDaaS (identity as a service), HRIS (human resources information system), CMDB (configuration management database), and device posture.
o Author initial policies (usually five to ten) and test them.
o Run policy simulation against recent logs (usually for two to four weeks).
o Enable monitor-only logging and forward to SIEM for assessment.
o Move to soft-enforcement of policies, then full-enforcement.
o Instrument decision logging to immutable storage and integrate with auditors.
o Review and refine quarterly, adding more applications gradually.
Challenges of attribute-based access control
Once it has been deployed, ABAC is simple to scale and integrate into security programs, but getting started takes some effort. While most agree that the benefits of ABAC are compelling, it is important to understand the challenges.
ABAC challenges for administrators
Implementation complexity is a significant challenge for administrators, because to manage ABAC, they must:
- Assign attributes to every component.
- Create a central policy engine to determine what attributes are allowed to do, based on various conditions (i.e., if X, then Y).
- Define all attributes.
- Gauge the permissions available to specific users before all attributes and rules are in place.
- Map authorization policies to create a comprehensive policy set to govern access.
Cross-industry ABAC challenges
- Poor or uncertain attribute sources can result in wrong decisions.
- Stale attributes (e.g., failure to update role changes or terminations) cause too much or not enough access to be granted.
- Policy complexity and the explosion of attributes make ABAC management difficult.
- Remote and complex attribute evaluations add latency.
- Difficulty explaining why a decision was made.
- Attributes themselves may be sensitive, creating legal and compliance exposure.
- Older applications were designed for RBAC and cannot consume ABAC’s rich attributes.
- Attribute modeling, testing, and governance add to operational overhead.
Industry-specific ABAC challenges
Healthcare (e.g., hospitals, clinics, and EHR systems)
- Challenge: Handling consent, context, and emergency (e.g., break-glass) conflicts is difficult with ABAC.
- Example: Restricted access with ABAC can cause a delay in care or potential privacy violations if policies do not safely handle emergency overrides, such as if a clinician normally cannot view certain medical notes but needs immediate access in an emergency.
Financial services (e.g., banks and trading platforms)
- Challenge: Tracking fine-grained separation of duties (SoD) to help meet strict regulatory audit requirements is difficult because attributes (e.g., transaction amount, account sensitivity, trade type, and clearance) must be evaluated together.
- Example: Incorrect attribute sourcing could allow unauthorized transfers or block legitimate compliance operations.
Government
- Challenge: Respecting classification levels, nationality, and special clearances is difficult across disparate assurance levels, compartmentalization, and legacy classification systems.
- Example: Cross-domain access failures or leak risk when attributes are not anchored to validated identity proofing.
Manufacturing
- Challenge: Constrained devices with no or intermittent connectivity may not have the capacity to query policy point decisions (PDPs) or carry complex attributes.
- Example: Production stoppages can occur if access issues cannot be evaluated and remediated.
Energy and utilities
- Challenge: Geographic and time-based access constraints and emergency overrides must be balanced with safety, critical access, and regulatory compliance across regions.
- Example: Unsafe operations or potential noncompliance fines can result when standard ABAC policies do not reflect regional rules or emergency protocols.
Retail and e-commerce
- Challenge: Attributes like past purchases, loyalty tiers, and cookie-derived signals can be volatile and privacy-sensitive.
- Example: ABAC makes it challenging to balance personalization and privacy for online users, risking overexposed customer data or inconsistent shopping experiences.
Cloud and SaaS providers
- Challenge: Providers must evaluate attributes across tenants at a massive scale while preventing cross-tenant leaks.
- Example: Cross-tenant data access or unacceptable latency can occur during extended ABAC policy evaluations.
Telecommunications
- Challenge: Mobile device users move between networks.
- Example: As users’ location attributes rapidly change, session handoffs can be denied or inappropriately allowed.
Education
- Challenge: Schools struggle with the impact of high churn of students and staff, mixed roles, and privacy for minors on ABAC management.
- Example: Because attributes change each semester and some records are protected, there is an increased chance of incorrect access to gradebooks, research data, or student health records being exposed or compromised.
Benefits of ABAC
Attribute-based access control allows situational variables to be controlled to help policy makers implement granular access. The attribute-based access control authorization model has unique capabilities that provide powerful benefits to organizations, including the following.
Cross-industry ABAC benefits
Broad range of policies
Virtually any kind of policy can be created, as ABAC’s only limitations are the attributes and the conditions that the computational language can express. It also enables administrators to use smart access restrictions that provide context for intelligent security, privacy, and compliance decisions. For instance, one group of employees may only have access to some types of information at certain times or only in a particular location.
Easy to use
Attribute-based access control is very user-intuitive. It hides technical permission sets behind an easy-to-use interface. Anyone with the right permissions can update a user profile and be assured that the user will have the access they need as long as their attributes are up to date. In addition, the maximum number of users can be granted access to the maximum available resources without administrators having to specify relationships between each user and object.
Fast onboarding of new users
ABAC models expedite the onboarding of new staff and external partners by allowing administrators and object owners to create policies and assign attributes that give new users access to resources. With attribute-based access control, existing rules or object characteristics do not need to be changed to grant this access.
Flexibility
With ABAC, almost any attribute can be represented and automatically changed based on contextual factors, such as which applications and types of data users can access, what transactions they can submit, and the operations they can perform.
Regulatory compliance
The increased security provided by attribute-based access control’s granular permissions and controls helps organizations meet compliance requirements for safeguarding personally identifiable information (PII) and other sensitive data set forth in legislation and rules (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS).
Scalability
Once ABAC has been set up, administrators can copy and reuse attributes for similar components and user positions, which simplifies policy maintenance and new user onboarding.
Industry-specific ABAC benefits
Healthcare
- Benefit: ABAC enforces purpose-of-use and consent, so clinical staff can access patient records only when the access is for treatment and permitted by the patient.
- Example: A nurse can immediately view a patient’s chart for care because “role=nurse” and “purpose=treatment” and “patientConsent=true,” while a researcher is blocked from identifiable records unless separate consent and IRB approval exist.
Financial services
- Benefit: ABAC prevents risky transactions by combining user roles with transaction context, reducing fraud, and supporting SOX segregation-of-duties requirements.
- Example: A junior trader can execute routine trades up to a fixed dollar limit from the corporate office, but any order above that threshold is automatically routed for senior-trader approval and requires additional authentication.
Government
- Benefit: ABAC enforces clearance and need-to-know together, limiting access to classified information to only those cleared and assigned to the relevant project.
- Example: An analyst with Top-Secret clearance who is not on the project team cannot open project documents, whereas the cleared project member can access them when on a secure network.
Manufacturing
- Benefit: ABAC protects safety and production integrity by allowing control actions only when the operator is certified and the equipment is in a safe state.
- Example: A technician may change a PLC (programmable logic controller) setting only during a scheduled maintenance window when “operatorCertification=valid” and “assetState=maintenance,” to prevent changes during live production.
Energy and utilities
- Benefit: ABAC limits operational control and visibility by geography and threat posture, reducing the risk of harmful or unauthorized grid actions.
- Example: A field engineer can make grid adjustments only for devices in their assigned zone and only when “threatLevel=normal” and their remote workstation meets device posture checks.
Retail and e-commerce
- Benefit: ABAC reduces fraud and financial loss by gating refunds or high-value actions based on contextual signals such as order value and fraud score.
- Example: Customer service reps can automatically issue refunds under a low dollar threshold, but any refund above that amount or with a high fraud score requires manager approval and additional verification.
Cloud and SaaS providers
- Benefit: ABAC enables per-tenant policy enforcement without custom coding to allow a single product to serve many customers with different entitlements safely.
- Example: Support agents can view a tenant’s dashboard only when the tenant ID matches and the tenant has explicitly granted support access to prevent accidental cross-tenant data exposure.
Telecom
- Benefit: ABAC prevents inappropriate provisioning by requiring ticket, context validation, and role checks before executing network changes.
- Example: A technician can push a firmware update only if “ticketStatus=approved,” the device ID matches the ticket, and the technician’s role is authorized for that device class.
Education
- Benefit: ABAC supports secure, time-bound collaboration by tying dataset access to project membership, IRB (institutional review board) approval, and contract terms.
- Example: A visiting researcher is granted access to a sensitive dataset for the duration of a funded project only after “IRBApproval=true” and “projectMembership=active,” with access automatically expiring at project close.
ABAC vs RBAC vs PBAC
Attribute-based access control (ABAC) and role-based access control (RBAC) are both common access-management methods. RBAC grants access based on flat or hierarchical roles where each role represents a set of entitlements or permissions, while ABAC evaluates user, resource, action, and environmental attributes to make contextual, fine-grained decisions.
Policy-based access control (PBAC), or policy-as-code, complements and supersedes these models by encoding authorization logic as declarative, versioned policies. PBAC policies can reference roles and attributes as well as external signals, such as risk score, location, or time. A centralized policy engine evaluates these inputs and provides consistent, testable, and auditable access decisions across systems.
| ABAC model | RBAC model | PBAC model |
|---|---|---|
| Existing roles are extended with attributes and policies (e.g., the relevant actions and resource characteristics, the location, time, and how the request is made). | Each user is assigned a role. | Roles may be referenced by policies, overrides, and exceptions without changing application code. |
| Authorization based on intelligent decisions. | Authorization only considers the role and associated privileges. | Authorization is based on centralized policy evaluation. |
| Access is based on individual attributes, consists of natural language, and includes context. | Access is granted only by roles. | Access is determined by human-readable, versioned policies (policy-as-code) that reference attributes, roles, and contextual inputs — enabling consistent, fine-grained, and testable access across systems. |
| Administrators can add, remove, and reorganize attributes without rewriting the policy. | New roles must be manually defined. | Changes are made by updating policy code or policy data (attributes/claims) and rolling through development pipelines. |
| Access is fine-grained. | Broad access is granted across the enterprise. | Access can be ultra–fine-grained. |
Choosing between ABAC, RBAC, and PBAC
Whether attribute-based access control or role-based access control is the right choice depends on the enterprise’s size, budget, and security needs. Size plays a big part in the choice, as ABAC’s initial implementation is cumbersome and resource-intensive.
| ABAC model | RBAC model | PBAC model |
|---|---|---|
| Resources available to support a complex implementation process | Need access controls, but lack resources for a complex implementation process | Can support upfront investment in policy lifecycle tooling |
| A large number of users with dynamic roles | Well-defined groups within the organization | A mix of static and highly dynamic users |
| Large organization with consistent growth | Organizational growth is not expected to be substantial | Want the ability to scale with growth easily |
| Workforce that is geographically distributed | Workforce that is centrally located | Hybrid workforce that is primarily geographically distributed |
| Need for deep, specific access control capabilities | Comfortable with broad access control policies | Want fine-grained controls managed as modular, testable, auditable policies |
ABAC and RBAC: A hybrid approach
Attribute-based access control and role-based access control can be used in conjunction to benefit from RBAC’s ease of policy administration with the flexible policy specifications and dynamic decision-making capabilities of ABAC. Using ABAC and RBAC (ARBAC) can provide powerful security and optimize IT resources.
The ARBAC hybrid approach allows IT administrators to automate basic access. It gives operations teams the ability to provide additional access to specific users through roles that align with the business structure. By making roles attribute-dependent, limitations can be applied to specific users automatically without searching or configuration.
This streamlines access assignments and minimizes the number of user profiles that need to be managed. With ARBAC, IT teams can essentially outsource the workload of onboarding and offboarding users to the decision-makers in the business.
For example, ARBAC can be used to enforce access control based on specific attributes with discretionary access control through profile-based job functions that are based on users’ roles. ARBAC can also support a risk-adaptable access control model with mutually exclusive privileges granted such that they enable the segregation of duties.
Support organizational security with ABAC
Attribute-based access control has become widely accepted as the authorization model of choice for many organizations. Not only is it incredibly powerful, but it eases part of the security administration burden.
DISCLAIMER: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, AND NOTHING CONVEYED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE ANY FORM OF LEGAL ADVICE. SAILPOINT CANNOT GIVE SUCH ADVICE AND RECOMMENDS THAT YOU CONTACT LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING APPLICABLE LEGAL ISSUES.
