Hi Susan,

> Do .NET clients play well with an XKMS server? Interoperability with .NET
> clients is an important concern for me.

I never tried XKMS in .Net, but as far as it is W3C standard, it should work 
also with .Net:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972954.aspx
http://www.w3.org/2001/07/xkms-ws/dillaway/XKMSWorkshop_files/frame.htm 
http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/xkms-part2.html

> XKMS does sound interesting, but it
> also sounds like XKMS would replace the certs issues by our existing PKI, and
> that wouldn't work for us.

XKMS doesn't replace PKI, but provide the façade for PKI:
http://ashakirin.blogspot.de/2013/04/cxf-security-getting-certificates-from.html

That means you can easily plug own lookup and validators into CXF XKMS 
implementation which will speak with your PKI.

Regards,
Andrei.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Susan Liebeskind [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Montag, 14. Oktober 2013 17:38
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: CXF WS-Trust/WS-SecureConversation security policy questions
> 
> On 10/14/2013 09:05 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> > Hi Susan,
> >
> > This sounds like a perfect use-case for XKMS. CXF ships with an XKMS
> > service, and also a a WSS4J "Crypto" implementation which can ask the
> > remote service for certificates for WS-Security. For example, see the
> > following system test:
> >
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/cxf/branches/2.7.x-fixes/systests/ws-secu
> > rity/src/test/java/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/xkms/
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/cxf/branches/2.7.x-fixes/systests/ws-secu
> > rity/src/test/resources/org/apache/cxf/systest/ws/xkms/
> >
> > I think using XKMS with the Symmetric binding is quite cool, as it
> > means the client does not need any keystores/certs at all stored
> > locally. I have a blog entry partially written on this that I must
> > publish :-)
> >
> >
> >
> 
> Hi Colm,
> 
> Do .NET clients play well with an XKMS server? Interoperability with .NET
> clients is an important concern for me. XKMS does sound interesting, but it
> also sounds like XKMS would replace the certs issues by our existing PKI, and
> that wouldn't work for us.
> 
> I guess it comes down to wanting a way to distribute the server cert back to
> the client using the mechanisms available from WS-Trust/STS (signed cert in
> the headers) and based on what Dennis has said, that isn't going to be
> possible.
> 
> I'll watch eagerly for that next blog post from you out XKMS  though :-)
> (http://coheigea.blogspot.com/, right?)
> 
> Thanks for the response.
> 
> Susan

Reply via email to