- From: Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:37:18 -0800
- To: "Abbie Barbir" <abbieb@nortelnetworks.com>
- Cc: "Edgar, Gerald" <gerald.edgar@boeing.com>, public-wsawg-security-tf@w3.org
Hi Abbie: I think that you are still over estimating the effort involved. If you think of the WSA as a framework architecture rather than a specific implementation arch, then all that is really required is to establish the key `entry points' that are necessary; and potentially point to the more specific specs. E.g., I doubt v. much that we need to investigate the presence or lack of support for security in WSDL. Really, the question that needs to be answered is: How does the WSA account for security The answer is going to be a combination of two things: the key concepts needed for security and a pointer to a more detailed spec. This is both easier and harder than dumping a list of specifics; easier because there should be less typing, harder because getting the right key is difficult. Frank On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 04:29 PM, Abbie Barbir wrote: > Gerald, and all, > > HI, > > I have been on the road with no e-mail access. > OK, > for the thursday meeting and the rest of the road map, here is what i > think we should do to the archtec draft. > 1. we should add a security section. the section will consist of the > following > a- basic security objectives, basically on my slides are the > Authentication authorization, etc.. > b- next we list the avilable techniques that are being standarized > today. we may even mention the techniques that are on the wish list in > OASIS and other SDO. > > The general approach will be the following: > 1. privacu issues (human behaior as opposed to data) is out of scope > of our work. > 2. need to mention that security is basically afeature, it be taken > into consideration the design of web serv ices. the approach should ne > compatible with the enterprize (or company security policy). wsa > security adds an extra dimension, and is part of the overall secuiryt. > > 3, we need to see if the wsa architecture has any mnajor misaalignment > with the arcitecture that SAML, XKMS, etc that are based on, if yes > (which I doubt) need to alighn the delta and decide if the approach > work or not. > > 4. Need to see if SOAP security thorug WS-Security is applicable or > not (ANy major issues with what URI defines or not). > > 5. Need to see if we need any requirements on WSDL, such as > specifiying security as a feature or not. > 6. Need to adress ws-policy, ws-privacy, ws-routing, etc. > 7. how does security relates to chroeography. what do we need to > mention there. > > > This is a good starting point for discussion, so please respond. > > I will be on the plane friday. > Gerald, if this e-mail does not make it to the list can u please fwd > it. > > > abbie > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Edgar, Gerald [mailto:gerald.edgar@boeing.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 11:14 AM > > To: Barbir, Abbie [CAR:1A00:EXCH] > > Subject: RE: public-wsawg-security-tf - where to start > > > > > > There has not been much activity yet. are we going to have > > teleconference meetings that we can get going? your > > presentation on web services security is a start, my diagrams > > are another cut. What will our next steps be? > > > > Gerald > > >
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 12:37:47 UTC