Re: Action Item - Part I: WSRX and MEP signaling on the wire (clarification)

John Kemp <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.distributed
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Mark,

Ultimately, it's the case that a PAOS-capable user-agent should be  
aware of related security considerations -- a PAOS-capable user-agent  
cannot rely on being protected by a firewall. In any case, this  
security consideration is noted directly in the PAOS specification  
(section 12 of [1]). In particular, PAOS-capable user-agent  
implementations are recommended to authenticate the requester via TLS/ 
SSL with certificate verification, an option certainly available to  
most existing user-agents. Such authentication may of course be  
performed by an intermediary (which may or may not specifically care  
about SOAP or PAOS) prior to dispatching the (SOAP) message to the  
PAOS-capable user-agent.

Cheers,

- JohnK

[1] http://www.projectliberty.org/specs/liberty-paos-v1.1.pdf

On Jan 12, 2006, at 9:12 PM, ext Mark Baker wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> On 1/12/06, John Kemp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Firewalls certainly come in different varieties, and some will be
>> smarter than others. But as something to which a SOAP message has
>> been dispatched (whether it's a SOAP request or a SOAP response) why
>> is it any more of a security risk to be dispatched a (SOAP) request
>> message that was in response to an (HTTP) message I sent than it is
>> to get a SOAP response to a SOAP request I sent?
>
> Because only requests are attempts to access services, and it's access
> to services that a firewall is trying to mediate.
>
>> From a course-
>> grained firewall (one that doesn't inspect the contents of the HTTP
>> response I guess) perspective, the HTTP response is still related to
>> the request that was sent, and the HTTP response is sent back to the
>> agent that initiated the HTTP request -- in both cases.
>
> "Related" isn't sufficient information for the firewall to do its job.
>
>>
>> Speaking only to the PAOS question, I would note that the user agent
>> receiving the HTTP response here will have explicitly advertised the
>> service it offers specifically to the HTTP server with which it is
>> interacting (via the PAOS HTTP header, during the HTTP request),
>> making this more secure in some respects than the reception of an
>> unsolicited SOAP request, which was not initiated by some action at
>> the associated user agent (such as the user explicitly requesting
>> some URL).
>
> It makes it more visible to intermediaries that know to look for that
> feature, enabling them to recognize the related incoming request if
> they want to ... which is all well and fine, but no help at all to the
> millions of existing firewalls which rely *only* on HTTP semantics to
> distinguish request and response.
>
> Mark.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.