Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)
Summary Definition: A cybersecurity approach where access privileges are granted based on an assigned role (i.e., functions, responsibilities, duties, etc.)
What is RBAC?
Role-based access control (RBAC) is a security framework that regulates access to systems, applications, and data based on the user’s job function or duties. It’s commonly used to safeguard both digital systems and physical resources in a controlled, scalable manner.
Rather than assigning permissions to individuals one by one, RBAC security groups users by their responsibilities and links them to specific sets of access rights, typically aligned with the user’s assigned tasks, department, seniority, etc.
By limiting access to only what’s necessary for each user’s duties, every RBAC role helps protect sensitive information, minimize security risks, and streamline access management. This, in turn, makes it easier for administrators to handle permissions across large teams.
Key Takeaways
- Role-based access control (RBAC) simplifies and strengthens cybersecurity by assigning system permissions based on users’ job functions rather than their individual identities.
- RBAC models range from basic to advanced—flat, hierarchical, constrained, and symmetric—each offering different levels of flexibility and control.
- Compared to alternative access control models, like attribute or rule-based access control, RBAC roles are a balanced, scalable approach to access management.
Why Does Role-Based Access Control Matter?
Assigning access rights based on predefined roles rather than individual users simplifies identity and access management (IAM) processes, which is especially useful when employees change roles or leave the company.
Moreover, using access roles strengthens overall security by adhering to the Principle of Least Privilege (POLP). This reduces the risk of data breaches or misuse by ensuring users can only access the resources necessary for their responsibilities.
How Does RBAC Work?
The RBAC model focuses on assigning permissions based on a role’s functions, authority, and responsibilities. How those roles and permissions are managed, however, varies based on the organization’s needs and the type of RBAC setup it implements.
Types of Role-Based Access Control
Like a pyramid, the different role-based control system types build upon each other to give administrators progressively greater flexibility.
- Standard or "flat" RBAC systems assign permissions to a role and roles to a user, allowing for overlap where needed (i.e., multiple roles can have the same permission, a single user can have multiple roles, etc.)
- A hierarchical system allows an access role with greater authority or clearance to inherit the RBAC permissions of the roles beneath them, simplifying the management process.
- Constrained RBACs add a layer of control to hierarchies by incorporating the concept of separation of duties (SOD) to avoid situations with potential fraud or conflicts of interest. A manager, for instance, should probably not be able to approve their own expense reports even if the “Manager” role has that permission. Therefore, constrained RBAC roles may require approval from another role (e.g., senior management, accounts payable, etc.)
- Symmetric RBAC systems allow administrators to audit and review how access roles and permissions are applied across the organization, allowing greater insight for role modifications.
Other Access Control Models
In addition to the various types of RBAC access, other access models, such as discretionary access control (DAC) and mandatory access control (MAC), offer alternative approaches to managing permissions.
DAC systems allow administrators to grant permissions and access at their discretion, traditionally by creating an access control list (ACL) that identifies each user's exact access and action permissions for a resource. While this type of system gives administrators ample flexibility, it’s less consistent and scalable than a role-based control setup.
MAC systems, on the other hand, enforce strict, centrally managed policies based on predefined security classifications, leaving no room for user-level modifications. Thus, they’re a far more predictable and scalable option but can’t customize permission sets for acute needs or situations.
Conversely, role-based access controls strike a balance between the two by focusing on predefined but adjustable roles that administrators can assign across entire departments and companies or customize for an individual user.
RBAC vs. ABAC
Attribute-based access control (ABAC) is another type of control model that grants access based on a combination of characteristics related to the access request, such as the user, resource(s) and action(s) involved, and digital environment. Some common attributes include:
- Time of day
- User's physical location or work department
- Resource's classification
This dynamic approach allows ABAC to offer more precise and context-aware access decisions, tailoring permissions based on specific, real-time criteria. However, the system configuration and maintenance can be substantially more complex than RBAC security.
RuBAC vs. RBAC
Contrary to RBAC and ABAC’s dynamic and adaptable criteria, rule-based access control systems (sometimes called RuBAC) enforce access through predefined, high-level rules—without regard to an employee's title or clearance level.
Security administrators set specific conditions (e.g., time of day, location, device type, etc.) for granting or denying a user's permissions and access. When an employee requests access, the system evaluates the employee's credentials against these established rules and responds accordingly.
This rigid, role-agnostic setup makes RuBAC models useful for situations or organizations that require broad, consistent security restrictions.
Unify HR and IT
Managing employee accounts can feel cumbersome and manual, but it's essential to ensure your team has the right access to the software they need to be productive. Without a unified process in place, this accountability is fragmented between HR data and IT systems, leading to inefficiencies and heightened security risks.