Hi,

 

Thanks for clearing that up. My job is to research the technologies and report 
back, so finding this out what is and isn't supported is valuable.

 

thanks,

 

Graeme
 
> Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:19:48 +0530
> Subject: Re: Rampart's support of the WSS SAML Token profile 1.1
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> 
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Graeme Jenkinson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> >
> >
> > Can someone confirm whether Rampart supports the WSS SAML Token profile 
> > (1.1)?
> 
> Yes - Rampart does support SAML Token Profile 1.1
> >
> >
> >
> > I am using Apache Synapse to proxy a legacy service; I am building a 
> > snapshot of Synapse that is picking up snapshots of Rampart and WSS4J. The 
> > proxy is secured using an asymmetric binding (X.509) with a SAML assertion 
> > passed as a SignedSupportingToken; the SAML assertion's 
> > SubjectConfirmationMethod is sender-vouches. My understanding of the WSS 
> > SAML Token profile is that - for sender-vouches - the attesting party must 
> > protect the SOAP message and the SAML assertion. However, I find that if I 
> > do neither of these things the assertion is still happily 'validated' by 
> > the proxy.
> 
> IIRC sender-vouches not supported yet...
> 
> Thanks & regards,
> -Prabath
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm fairly new to Rampart (although I have a good understanding of 
> > standards and their implementation in Metro) so I may be missing something 
> > obvious. Also I may be muddying the water a little through using of 
> > Synapse. However, looking at WSS4J I note that I states explict suppot for 
> > the Username and X.509 token profiles without mentioning SAML.
> >
> >
> >
> > If anyone can definitively state Ramparts (and WSS4J's) support for the 
> > SAML Token profile that would be a great help.
> >
> >
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > Graeme
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Prabath Siriwardena
> 
> http://blog.facilelogin.com
> http://RampartFAQ.com
                                          

Reply via email to