[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [XML Signature] DSig-01
Scott, >> A drawback with enveloped signatures is that they clobber >> messages which is likely to be the reason why SOAP do not use such. >No, I think SOAP uses them detached because SOAP views the signing >aspect as a separate "module" from the core spec. I don't think SAML's >use of signing is quite so separate. But it could be, it's really just a >matter of what seems appropriate for the use case. Actually, my question was really about SAML, Dsig and SOAP bindings, that "seem" a bit non-conformat versus the SOAP Dsig Note. In addition I cannot help thinking that external signature containers are easier to use as they do not require modifications to the documents to be signed. None of the S/MIME-ways of signing require such measures either. In OBI V4 we will use SOAP's way of signing for SOAP-enveloped messages. The reason for this is that we believe that interoperability should gain from that, not that it is technically superior. This is our number #1 priority as OBI is designed to be fully plug-and-play. Anders
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC