August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WSRP v2 leveraging WS-Security Discussion 1. WS-* Standards 2. WS-Securtiy Interop&Implementations 3. Customer demands.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The e-Framework Bill Olivier Director Development, Systems and Technology JISC.
Advertisements

Overview of Web Services
OASIS WSRP Technical Commitee Web Services for Remote Portlets (WSRP) Overview OASIS WSRP Technical Commitee September, 2003.
All Contents © 2003 Burton Group. All rights reserved. Identity Management Market Update Prepared for Cal State Universities Mike Neuenschwander senior.
0 Web Service Security JongSu Bae. 1  Introduction 2. Web Service Security 3. Web Service Security Mechanism 4. Tool Support 5. Q&A  Contents.
© The Middleware Company SOA Blueprints Learning Best Practices and Sample Applications for SOA Steve Wilkes Senior Middleware Maven 7 THE MIDDLEWARE COMPANY.
Copyright © The OWASP Foundation Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the OWASP License. The OWASP.
WS-Security TC Christopher Kaler Kelvin Lawrence.
T Network Application Frameworks and XML Service Federation Sasu Tarkoma.
December 19, 2006 Solving Web Single Sign-on with Standards and Open Source Solutions Trey Drake AssetWorld 2007 Albuquerque, New Mexico November 2007.
© 2009 The MITRE Corporation. All rights Reserved. April 28, 2009 MITRE Public Release Statement Case Number Norman F. Brickman, Roger.
Secure Web Services Akylbek Zhumabayev Rochester Institute of Technologies.
Secure Systems Research Group - FAU Web Services Standards Presented by Keiko Hashizume.
The Early Life of WS-ReliableMessaging Where we are, and how we got here Jorgen Thelin Program Manager – WS-* Workshops Microsoft Corporation.
Copyright © The OWASP Foundation Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the OWASP License. The OWASP.
Web Service Standards, Security & Management Chris Peiris
Strategy Directorate Web Services Technologies Diane McDonald, Strathclyde University Institutional Web Managers.
Catalyst 2002 SAML InterOp July 15, 2002 Prateek Mishra San Francisco Netegrity.
Application Server Technology : The State of the Art Gary Barnett IT Research Director July 2002
Shib in the present and the future Ken Klingenstein Director, Internet2 Middleware and Security.
Copyright © 2004 by The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I). All Rights Reserved 1 Interoperability: Ensuring the Success of Web Services.
Web Services and HL7v3 in IHE profiles Vassil Peytchev Epic.
WS-Security: SOAP Message Security Web-enhanced Information Management (WHIM) Justin R. Wang Professor Kaiser.
WSDL Tutorial Ching-Long Yeh 葉慶隆 Department of Computer Science and Engineering Tatung University
Web Services Security Standards Overview for the Non-Specialist Hal Lockhart Office of the CTO BEA Systems.
Copyright © 2004 by The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I). All Rights Reserved 1 Interoperability: Ensuring the Success of Web Services.
Promoting Web Services Interoperability Across Platforms, Applications and Programming Languages Basic Profile 1.0 August 12, 2003 Copyright © 2003 by.
SAML 2.1 Building on Success. Outline n Summary of SAML 2.0 n Work done since 2.0 n Objectives of SAML 2.1 n Proposed Task List n Undecided Issues n Invitation.
Catalyst 2002 SAML InterOp July 15, 2002 San Francisco.
Developing Web Services Using ASP.NET and WSE That Interoperate with the Windows Communications Foundation ("Indigo") Mark Fussell COM432 Lead Program.
Web Services. Abstract  Web Services is a technology applicable for computationally distributed problems, including access to large databases What other.
Secure Systems Research Group - FAU Patterns for Web Services Security Standards Presented by Keiko Hashizume.
Semantic Web Technologies Research Topics and Projects discussion Brief Readings Discussion Research Presentations.
EGEE-II INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Security Token Service Valéry Tschopp - SWITCH.
Prabath Siriwardena – Software Architect, WSO2. Patterns Standards Implementations Plan for the session.
Interoperability Testing. Work done so far WSDL subgroup Generated Web Service Description with aim for maximum interoperability between various SOAP.
Status Update on Other GFIPM Activity Threads GFIPM Delivery Team Meeting November 2011.
Gridshell Security Master Project Akylbek Zhumabayev Rochester Institute of Technology.
OASIS | November 16, 2003 Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards OASIS OASIS | November 18, 2003 Web Services Remote Portlets.
Web Services Security Patterns Alex Mackman CM Group Ltd
© 2004 IBM Corporation ICSOC2004 Panel Discussion: Grid Systems: What is needed from web service standards? Jeffrey Frey IBM.
Using WS-I to Build Secure Applications Anthony Nadalin Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I) Copyright 2008, WS-I, Inc. All rights reserved.
Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) Interoperability Demonstration.
July 28, 2004WSRF Technical Committee F2F meeting1 WSRP leveraging WSRF Use case for Portlets as WS-Resources.
Wednesday, 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM Telecom SOA Profile  WS Addressing  WS reliable messaging  WS security  SOAP over JMS  General improvement of specs with.
Promoting Web services interoperability across platforms, applications and programming languages Overview Presentation September, 2003.
Secure Web Services Akylbek Zhumabayev Rochester Institute of Technologies.
SAML Interoperability Lab RSA Conference Agenda SAML and the OASIS SSTC SAML Timeline Brief SAML History SAML Interop Lab Q & A Demo.
Web Services Security Mike Shaw Architectural Engineer.
KMIP Compliance Redefining Server and Client requirements to claim compliance Presented by: Bob Lockhart.
1 WS-Security Yosi Taguri Microsoft Israel
SOA Blueprints Learning Best Practices and Sample Applications for SOA Miko Matsumura.
August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WSRP v2 leveraging WS-Security 1. Motivation 2. WS-Securtiy Roadmap and Status 3. WSRP Use Cases 4. Strawman/Issues.
WS ►I Promoting Web services interoperability across platforms, applications and programming languages October, 2002.
Access Policy - Federation March 23, 2016
Shibboleth Roadmap
Introduction How to combine and use services in different security domains? How to take into account privacy aspects? How to enable single sign on (SSO)
Web Services Security Challenges
Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards
Web Services Interoperability Organization
Tim Bornholtz Director of Technology Services
Web Services Enhancements 2.0
Presentation transcript:

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WSRP v2 leveraging WS-Security Discussion 1. WS-* Standards 2. WS-Securtiy Interop&Implementations 3. Customer demands 4. Why leveraging 5. Timeframes 6. Approach

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WS-* Standards  WS-Security approved OASIS standard, April 2004 Spec, Username Token Profile, X.509 Token Profile Drafts profiles: SAML Token, Kerberos Token, REL Token, Minimalist Profile Supporting companies –AmberPoint, Argonne National Library, BEA, Betrusted, Booz Alan Hamilton, Computer Assiociates, Content Guard, Documentum, Entegrity, Entrust, Forum Systems, Fujitsu, GeoTrust, HP, Hitachi, IBM, Lockhead Martin, Microsoft, Netegrity, Nokia, Nortel Networks, Novell, Oblix, Open Network, Oracle, RSA Security, SAP, Sarvega, SeeBeyond, Sun, Systinet, Tibco, Verisign, US Navy, Westbridge Technology Large support in the community, WS-Security seems to be well accepted Gartner: “ Gartner believes that WS-Security will be the standard for the majority of Web services, and committing to it now will allow enterprises to easily modify the security profile of deployed Web services in the future.“

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WS-Security Interop  WS-Security TC defined basic WSS-Interop scenarios Companies participating: –Microsoft, Cyclone, Systinet, IBM, Reactivity, RSA, Fujitsu, Hitachi, Baltimore, BEA, Verisign  WS-Security TC drafted WSS-SAML-Interop scenarios Using the WSS-SAML-Profile (draft), leveraging SAML V1.1 Assertions  WS-I published Basic Security Profile draft + scenarios Utilizing WS-Security in an interoperable manner Expectations that vendors will implement their stacks to support that profile  WS-I Supply Chain Management Sample Application Exercises WS-I Basic Profile Started first Interop tests using WS-I Basic Security Profile –IBM, Microsoft, Novell, Oracle, Sun Opportunity for WSRP TC to bring up our use cases? 12/SCMArchitecture1.01.pdf

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee WS-Security Implementations  Vendors IBM – WebSphere Application Server Microsoft -.Net BEA - WebLogic RSA's BSafe SWS-J Reactivity Manager and Reactivity Gateway 2400 Series Systinet – WASP Server Apache WSS4J Versisign Others?  It is expected that other vendors will announce products supporting WS-Security, too

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee Customer demands  We as the TC have identified various security use cases as priority one Major one seems userid propagation and SSO  How urgent are our use cases? Especially to our customers and to the market expectation  IBM WebSphere Portal customers Need userid to be propagated across portals to enable full end-user experience Need SSO across products (other portals and backend systems) Preferably let the middleware (app servers) do the authentication, use established security context in their applications Most are only concerned with intranet scenarios so far Feel the lack of userid propagation is limiting the usage of web services including WSRP  Other companies?

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee Why Leveraging WS-*?  Need to keep our labors focused on the WSRP-specific issues and leverage other expertise and efforts WS-Security as a base framework is *the* security standard for web services Doing this at the application level would duplicate efforts, may cause incompatibilities  WS-* enables a modular approach to solve different security areas We could take a staged approach to solve our use cases Take the basic steps first (prio1 use cases), then extend the overall solution  WS-Security is already there (since April 2004) Widely accepted by the industry Implementations are on their way Middleware will support applications in handling security WS-I develops profiles for security interoperability –We could inject our use cases to be included in interop tests –Our demands seem to be typical/similar/common to other web app’s demands, therefore our use cases should be well understood and accepted Seems major parts to solve our priority 1 use cases are already in place

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee Timeframes  WSRP 2.0 planned for mid 2005 Experience shows we could slightly delay WSRP 1.0 adoption took ½-1 year, many implementation not there even yet Estimated WSRP 2.0 adoption would be mid-2006  WS-Security is already available Adoptions likely to be available end of 2004-mid 2005 We should use what is there now –i.e. could have a WSRP Security profile as an spec independent part?  Need to figure out if we really need the other standards immediately to solve our use cases i.e. perhaps no need for WS-Policy now, but take a simpler approach and wait till policy is there Would apply to other WS-* roadmap items, too Would have the chance to inject our requirements there; add them to interop testing profiles from an early phase on

August 3, 2004WSRP Technical Committee Proposed Approach  Tackle userid propagation first Use what WS-Security provides us –Username Token (available now) –XML Token/SAML assertion (draft available)  Apply other requirements Trust between Consumer & Producer Message Integrity & Confidentiality Could use what WS-Security provides us here (message level security) Alternatively could use transport layer security for these purposes  How to deal with communicating requirements and capabilities? WS-Policy not there yet Do we need WS-Policy from the beginning on? Develop WSRP security profiles –Take an layered approach, i.e. profiles could express various levels of support of the areas like “need Username token for user id”, “needs to encrypt body”, “use SSL for mutual authentication”, etc. –Refer to WS-I Basic Security Profiles, and other well understood profiles –Refer to these profiles in our metadata or defined meta-data extensions, i.e. Producer/Portlet expresses its requirements based on these profiles –Later could either pull these simple indicators into WSRP 2.0 metadata or (if applicable) switch to what WS-Policy provides us