Minutes from 4/3 WSRP Security Subgroup Telecon
Attendees:�
Mark Cassidy, Jeff Broberg, Greg Pavlik, Rich Thompson, Alejandro
Abdelnur, Petr Palas, Michael Freedman, Yossi Tamari, Thomas Schaeck, Carsten
Leue, Dave Clegg
Agenda item #1.�
High level scenario discussion:
- Initial comment from JeffB:� should we focus on the existing Embedded use
case?� Concerned about proliferation of
scenarios;� consensus was to stick with
security-centric use cases until requirements are more clearly understood.�� It may make sense then to combine security
into one of the other primary use cases.
- MarkC did brief walk-through of
the high-level scenario document.
Comments:
- WSRP services may employ techniques for document
encryption, secure transport, digital signing, etc.� May need to include information in the service metadata on which
are employed by the remote portlet.�
Also a possibility that an upcoming WSDL rev may provide this support(RichT)
- SOAP differences between MS, IBM need to be
considered to avoid using techniques that will only work on one vendor�s
platform(ThomasS)
- WSIA & WSRP share common
security issues.� Embedded use case
document from WSIA lists numerous standards efforts currently active in the
security arena.(RichT)
Several proposed focus points
emerged from discussions:
- Portal
identity, establishment of trust between portal and portlet; Thomas
offered a lifecycle metaphor:
�
- establishment of trust relationship at initial service bind
�
- use of credentials established above for service requests
�
- removal of trust relationship when service is revoked
Questions to answer under this
point include:
What types of credentials need to
be supported/exchanged between portal and portlet?
How are credentials passed in a
service request?
What are potential approaches for establishing and
revoking trust?
- End
user identity:� Yossi offered
three different cases:
- Anonymous:� no end-user info is passed to the portlet
- Identified:�
some identity and possibly other attribute information about the end user
is passed to the portlet.
- Authenticated:� some credential about the end user is passed
to the portlet
Alejandro commented that the
mechanism for passing end user identity/attributes to the portlet should be
part of the scope of this sub-group�s effort.
Questions to answer here include:
How is end-user identity info
passed from portal to portlet?
What types of end-user credentials
need to be supported?
What are the possible ways for
passing end-user credentials?
- Secure
Transmission:� This deals with
protecting sensitive data during transmission between portal and portlet.
����� -
document-level encryption
����� -
transport-level encryption
Questions here include:
Which current standards efforts deal with
document-level encryption?� Which should
we focus on for WSRP as a concrete approach?�
What about secure transport?� There is SSL for http; since we shouldn�t be
specifying a transport however, are there other secure transport
standards?� Is there a mechanism to secure
the envelope without secure transport underlying?(MikeF comment)
- Preventing
Impersonation:�
How to secure against an
impersonator from obtaining sensitive data or obtaining unauthorized
service.�
��
- digital signatures could fall under this topic
��
- this might overlap with one or several of the above.�
Questions here include:
�
- What standards for digitally signing documents should be considered?
Agenda item #2:��
Additional Scenarios
Since we didn�t have any input
from a content provider�s perspective, we wanted to specifically solicit
feedback from the following people:
- Bob Serr, Nigel Ratcliffe, and Mark
Rosenberg:� we�d like scenario input
from your companies� perspectives focusing on the points a-d above.
Comment from Dave Clegg: another possible
scenario:� nesting/embedded; if there
are other intermediaries in the path between portal a portlet, may not want to
expose end-user information to the intermediaries; do we need a mechanism to
keep end-user data secure through middle tier services?
Agenda item #3:� Actions, Next steps
1.� RichT will update Embedded document with
status of related standards efforts and summarize in next meeting.
2.� MarkC to integrate the various
issues/views� into an organized set of
discussion topics to focus on(initial cut at this captured in a-d above, culled
from meeting notes).�
3.� Scenario inputs from Bob/Nigel/Mark
4.� Thomas to provide additional scenario input
related to (a) above
5.� Yossi to provide scenario input to (b)
above�
Editor�s note:� Prior to the next meeting, I�d like to have
feedback/mail discussion on whether a-d above is a reasonable way to look at
the issues in the scope of this working group.�
If we can agree to use this or something close as our starting point,
I�ll update the scenario doc that I started prior to the meeting to reflect
these focal points.� The agenda for the
next meeting then would be to review additional scenario inputs from those
named above, and begin working through the questions related to each focal
point.
-