- From: Doug Davis via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:53:49 +0000
- To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
Update of /w3ccvs/WWW/2002/ws/ra/edcopies
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv32608
Modified Files:
wst.xml
Log Message:
7191
Index: wst.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /w3ccvs/WWW/2002/ws/ra/edcopies/wst.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.47
retrieving revision 1.48
diff -u -d -r1.47 -r1.48
--- wst.xml 18 Aug 2009 21:12:48 -0000 1.47
+++ wst.xml 18 Aug 2009 21:53:47 -0000 1.48
@@ -1413,7 +1413,7 @@
</div1>
<div1 id="Security_Considerations">
<head>Security Considerations</head>
- <p>It is strongly recommended that the communication between services be
+ <p>It is strongly RECOMMENDED that the communication between services be
secured using the mechanisms described in <bibref ref="WsSec"/>.</p>
<p>In order to properly secure messages, the body (even if empty) and all
relevant headers need to be included in the signature. Specifically, the
@@ -1422,15 +1422,15 @@
need to be signed along with the body in order to "bind" them together and
prevent certain types of attacks.</p>
<p>If a requestor is issuing multiple messages to a resource reference, then
- it is recommended that a security context be established using the mechanisms
- described in WS-Trust and WS-SecureConversation. It is further recommended
+ it is RECOMMENDED that a security context be established using the mechanisms
+ described in WS-Trust and WS-SecureConversation. It is further RECOMMENDED
that if shared secrets are used, message-specific derived keys also be used
to protect the secret from crypto attacks.</p>
<p>The access control semantics of resource references is out-of-scope of
this specification and are specific to each resource reference. Similarly,
any protection mechanisms on resource references independent of transfer
(e.g. embedded signatures and encryption) are also out-of-scope.</p>
- <p>It is recommended that the security considerations of WS-Security also be
+ <p>It is RECOMMENDED that the security considerations of WS-Security also be
considered.</p>
<p>While a comprehensive listing of attacks is not feasible, the following
list summarizes common classes of attacks that apply to this protocol and
@@ -1499,7 +1499,7 @@
<p>
<emph>Availability</emph> - All reliable messaging services are
subject to a variety of availability attacks. Replay detection is a
- common attack and it is recommended that this be addressed by the
+ common attack and it is RECOMMENDED that this be addressed by the
mechanisms described in WS-Security. Other attacks, such as network-level
denial of service attacks are harder to avoid and are outside the scope
of this specification. That said, care SHOULD be taken to ensure that
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 21:53:58 UTC