Re: [ekmi] SKSML Message Integrity and Confidentiality

[Anil Saldhana <Anil.Saldhana@redhat.com>]

I correct myself.  The right term is "Binding".

So for v1.0, I am proposing that we make the following bindings mandatory:
a) SOAP/WS-S Binding.
b) TLS Binding  (Mutual Authentication only).

A REST based profile can be done as a follow up to v1.0

I will provide the updated specification draft soon.

On 10/20/2009 04:43 AM, Tomas Gustavsson wrote:
> I think that is a very good idea. Implementing TLS authentication is
> much simpler than using WS-security for authentication, at least with
> current java tools. So different profiles there sounds like a good idea
> to me.
>
> Regards,
> Tomas
>
>
> Anil Saldhana wrote:
>    
>> Hi all,
>>    during the development of SKSML v1.0, there was a mandatory dependence
>> on the SOAP/WS-Security layer to provide the integrity and
>> confidentiality needs. I had made some observations that this can be
>> updated to include other modes such as mutually authenticated TLS or
>> just plain xml over a transport in situations requiring lower levels of
>> trust (say within a protected environment).  Anyway, the keys returned
>> are REQUIRED to be encrypted, irrespective of existence of a SOAP/WSS
>> layer.
>>
>> Since we will be going to public review 02 of the specification to
>> include WSDL, xsd changes etc, I would like to introduce the concept of
>> profiles into the specification, requiring a SOAP profile for
>> compliance. But implementations should be able to provide other forms
>> (mutual TLS or plain xml over a transport) as add-ons.
>>
>> Please share your thoughts?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Anil