Here is the original message from Anne Anderson regards David -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [OGSA-AUTHZ] Web Services (Policy?) profile of/for XACML Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:01:44 -0500 From: Anne Anderson - Sun Microsystems <Anne.Anderson@sun.com> Reply-To: Anne.Anderson@sun.com Organisation: Sun Microsystems, Inc. To: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk> CC: Yuri Demchenko <demch@science.uva.nl>, OGSA AUTHZ WG <ogsa-authz-wg@ogf.org> References: <45D1DABA.4050507@kent.ac.uk> <45DC756B.5090104@science.uva.nl> <45DCAB9B.7080508@kent.ac.uk> The original SAML 1.0 Authorization Decision Query and Statement were "frozen" as of SAML 2.0, with a reference to the "SAML 2.0 profile of XACML v2.0" as a suggested replacement. The "SAML 2.0 profile of XACML v2.0" is very much alive and has not been deprecated; it is a full OASIS and ITU-T Standard. You can find a copy on the XACML TC Home Page along with the other XACML 2.0 specifications: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/manage/edit_notes.php#XAC.... There were some errors in the spec and schemas that are corrected in the "SAML 2.0 profile of XACML v2.0 Errata" available at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15447/xacml-2.0-saml-errat... The XACML TC is updating the "SAML 2.0 profile of XACML" as part of its XACML 3.0 release. The updates are intended to be backwards compatible, and consist primarily of some additions to support the XACML 3.0 Administrative Policy specification, such as the ability for a PEP to send a policy to be evaluated along with the request context. The draft of this update is available at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/18921/xacml-2.0-profile-sa... I should be issuing a new draft before too long. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Regards, Anne David Chadwick wrote On 02/21/07 15:29,:
Hi Yuri
firstly we have a lot of opportunity to feed our comments into Anne, the author, and I am sure she will be very receptive to our helpful input.
Concerning its purpose, it can be used in negotiation for the sender to say what his requirement are from the other party, and what his capabilities are for providing a service to the other party. However, this is not really what we want from this service. We simply want the ability to provide an XACML request context in a secure manner to a remote PDP, and to obtain an XACML response context from the PDP. Which is why the SAML profile (that is now deprecated) was actually ideal for us (and why my first OGF spec was based on it). So my question to Anne would be, Can we make sure this new spec has the same functionality (at least) as the previous SAML spec.
regards
David
Yuri Demchenko wrote:
Hi David,
I looked at the document your sent and was a bit confused to position it among other standards in use and our work.
Before we can discuss some minor detail, I want to say that title is a bit misleading. They call it "Web Services Profile of XACML (WS-XACML)" but actually it is Web Services Policy (WSP) profile/extensions for (using) XACML in WSP style policy definition.
They provided good use cases in Introduction, and correctly described XACML AuthZ token (section 2).
For me, it is not clear their definition of XACMLAuthZAssertion (section 3). Is this an assertion or policy statement?
"An XACMLAuthzAssertion represents an XACML authorization, access control, or privacy policy that applies to the target of the wsp:Policy instance in which it appears. The Assertion MAY be used by a Web Service to express or publish its authorization, access control, or privacy requirements or its capability of complying with requirements imposed by a client. The Assertion MAY be used by a Web Services client to express or publish its authorization, access control, or privacy requirements requirements or its capability of complying with requirements imposed by a Web Service. Two instances of such an Assertion MAY be matched to determine whether they are compatible, and, if so, which requirements and capabilities are compatible."
Also I didn't find support for so much expected cryptographically valid/ensured attributes.
So, what possibilities do we have to give our comments to the author?
Yuri
David Chadwick wrote:
is attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-authz-wg mailing list ogsa-authz-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-authz-wg
-- Anne H. Anderson Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM Sun Microsystems Laboratories 1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311 Tel: 781/442-0928 Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA Fax: 781/442-1692 -- ***************************************************************** David W. Chadwick, BSc PhD Professor of Information Systems Security The Computing Laboratory, University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NF Skype Name: davidwchadwick Tel: +44 1227 82 3221 Fax +44 1227 762 811 Mobile: +44 77 96 44 7184 Email: D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk Home Page: http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dwc8/index.html Research Web site: http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/research/groups/iss/index.html Entrust key validation string: MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J PGP Key ID is 0xBC238DE5 *****************************************************************