[jira] [Closed] (CXF-7088) SignedEncryptedSupportingTokens in WS-Policy and SAML not encrypted being accepted

["Colm O hEigeartaigh (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Colm O hEigeartaigh closed CXF-7088.
------------------------------------

> SignedEncryptedSupportingTokens in WS-Policy and SAML not encrypted being accepted
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CXF-7088
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7088
>             Project: CXF
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.6
>            Reporter: Grzegorz Maczuga
>            Assignee: Colm O hEigeartaigh
>         Attachments: message_anonymous.txt, policy.txt
>
>
> In WS-Policy that is used by service we have defined 
> <SignedEncryptedSupportingTokens/>
> Some people say that WS-SecurityPolicy 1.2 imply that also SAML assertion that is inside WS-Security section of the message SOAP Header should be encrypted (not only signed).
> Message with SAML that is NOT encrypted is currently accepted by CXF even while policy defines <SignedEncryptedSupportingTokens/>
> Question is: does SAML assertion fall into "SupportingTokens" category and should be encrypted as well?
> What is your view on that? Is that a bug in Neethi?
> See http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/ws-securitypolicy/200702/ws-securitypolicy-1.2-spec-os.html#_Toc161826566
> Signed, encrypted supporting tokens are Signed supporting tokens (See section 8.2) that are also encrypted when they appear in the wsse:SecurityHeader. Element Encryption SHOULD be used for encrypting the supporting tokens.
> The syntax for the sp:SignedEncryptedSupportingTokens differs from the syntax of sp:SignedSupportingTokens only in the name of the assertion itself. All nested policy is as per the sp:SignedSupportingTokens assertion.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)