Subject: signature and encryption in SOAP - was -> RE: Comparison of ICAP and SOAP

From: "Carr, Wayne" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:04:09 -0700

There is a SOAP Security Extensions Digital Signature W3C Note from last
February   http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-dsig/

Work in the XML encryption group http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/ is
coming along nicely and there will be a parallel mechanism for SOAP with
encryption.

The SOAP 1.2 draft http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-20010709/ is baseline
SOAP functionality.  Quite a lot is being added on top of it to satisfy
specific needs like digital signature and encryption.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 7:58 AM
> To: Keith Moore
> Cc: Tomlinson, Gary; Randy Bush; Lloyd Wood; John Martin; 
> [email-masked];
> [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Comparison of ICAP and SOAP
> 
> 
> 
> Web Services intermediaries will certainly exist and use SOAP; whether
> they are exactly like the current OPES model is still unclear. Indeed
> the security/integrity problems have to be solved, and this is more
> fundamental than debating the ICAP hammer and the SOAP screwdriver.
> 
>   Brian
> 
> Keith Moore wrote:
> > 
> > >  Several of us have long believed that with an OPES 
> framework, multiple
> > > existing remote procedure call protocols including iCAP 
> and SOAP can
> > > be added to an authenticated and authorized intermediate 
> proxy model.
> > 
> > so by adding components that can alter data in transit, you're going
> > to increase the level of integrity?    right.
> > 
> > Keith
>