Re: [wsrp-interop] Re: [wsrp] Anonymous User

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

Not supplying a security token is the most ideal, since by doing so, the 
sender is telling the producer that either that it does not know who the 
user is, or that it cannot generate one.

The producer then has a choice - it could either interpret lack of the 
token to mean an anonymous user, or reject the message altogether. I 
would expect a WSDL policy attachment to specify which way the producer 
intends to behave.

Subbu

Rich Thompson wrote:
> 
> I suspect most systems default to the guest user (if allowed) when no 
> user credentials are supplied. Is anyone aware of systems not following 
> this behavior?
> 
> Rich
> 
> 
> *Nathan Lipke <nlipke@bea.com>*
> 
> 08/08/2006 01:36 AM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	Michael Freedman <michael.freedman@oracle.com>
> cc
> 	wsrp <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>, wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject
> 	Re: [wsrp] Anonymous User
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, WS-Security does not account for anonymous/guest users. SAML
> suffers from the same issue. I'm a little concerned about using a string
> for the username as it may interfere with existing username token
> implementations. Perhaps we should sign something else (the body or a
> timestamp) in the case of the anonymous user.
> 
> --
> Nate
> 
> Michael Freedman wrote:
> 
>  > Folks, it doesn't look like there is a formal convention in
>  > WS-Security to pass an anonymous/guest user identity particularly when
>  > relying on UserName Token or Username token with password.  Am I
>  > mistaken?  If not I wonder if there is an accidental convention in our
>  > wsrp implementations -- what if anything do you do in this regards?
>  >
>  > To be clear we are concerned about a situtation in which the consumer
>  > identifies itself to the producer (via a digital signature) and wants
>  > to use the UserName Token mechanism to identify the user on whose
>  > behalf this consumer is making the request.  We want a known
>  > form/value that (wsrp) intercepters/the security system (if it
>  > supports such a concept) will map to an anonymous user/guest.  Should
>  > this be (a nil) the lack of a UserName token?  A UserName token whose
>  > value is ""?  A Username token whose value is wsrp:minimal?  Any of
>  > these?
>  >    -Mike-
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
> entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
> and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
> by email and then delete it.
>