Re: [egov] Missing Securty: Update Working Draft for Workflow Standards

["Anders Rundgren" <anders.rundgren@telia.com>]

Monica & List.
I have some input regarding security standards which seems to be lacking.

You could add WS-Security for example.  However, it is also
important to note that many pieces still are entirely absent and are
not even known targets for standardization.  The most obvious deficit
is the lack of a method for a user to sign a document/transaction in
a browser environment.  The only thing I have heard of is XAML that
MSFT is putting in Longhorn that unfortunately requires that
we all convert to Longhorn.  All e-govs are currently investing in
proprietary signature solutions making inter-agency workflow a local
matter and definitely not cross-border.

For those who are interested in security it may be interesting to
know that the PKI pioneered by the US federal agencies is
largely incompatible with any kind of workflow system server
as a concept that is based on using encryption certificates of employees
will disable any intermediary service like a purchasing system
from reading outgoing messages.  The governments in northern
Europe have therefore defined an entirely different PKI architecture
that is compatible with any kind of workflow process.

So maybe you should extend your paper with "missing standards"
as well?

Anders Rundgren
Consultant e-infrastructure

----- Original Message -----
From: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
To: "OASIS eGov list" <egov@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 15:46
Subject: [egov] 10/4/2004: Update Working Draft for Workflow Standards


See attached updated workflow draft. It is important to note that:

    * Changes may be forthcoming in WfMC that may complement/change this
      evaluation, similar to those that occurred in BPMI.org.
    * New emerging specifications may complement/replace WfMC capabilities.
    * More information is required to understand the relative importance
      of the human workflow, the process definition and the conditions
      and constraints applied (and visible to the enabling processes).
    * I've not updated any recommendations pending feedback from the
      eGov team and user community.

I would encourage any feedback as I have not received any to date other
than from John Borras (and to complement the great work by eEnvoy). See
you in a few! I will upload to eGov site as well. Thank you.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.