In the FDI security framework, how is the mapping from security context to data role defined?

In the FDI security framework, how is the mapping from security context to data role defined?

• A. Many-to-one
• B. One-to-one
• C. One-to-many
• D. Many-to-many

Answer: (B)

One-to-one mapping means each security context yields exactly one data role, and that data role is tied to that specific security context. This provides precise, deterministic authorization decisions that are easy to audit and trace, since there’s a unique link between who you are and the data privileges you’re granted. It prevents ambiguity and simplifies policy management, because no single security context can unlock multiple roles and no data role is shared across different contexts. If the mapping were many-to-one, or one-to-many, or many-to-many, accountability and auditing would become murkier, and access control would be harder to reason about. So the one-to-one approach offers clear, enforceable control over data access in the security framework.

One-to-one mapping means each security context yields exactly one data role, and that data role is tied to that specific security context. This provides precise, deterministic authorization decisions that are easy to audit and trace, since there’s a unique link between who you are and the data privileges you’re granted. It prevents ambiguity and simplifies policy management, because no single security context can unlock multiple roles and no data role is shared across different contexts. If the mapping were many-to-one, or one-to-many, or many-to-many, accountability and auditing would become murkier, and access control would be harder to reason about. So the one-to-one approach offers clear, enforceable control over data access in the security framework.