From asa.openliberty at zenn.net  Wed Dec  5 14:45:28 2007
From: asa.openliberty at zenn.net (Asa Hardcastle)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:45:28 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] ClientLib Dev Call: Dec 6 @ 8am pacific
Message-ID: <93D2F684-F493-439D-83D2-4C23E436B6A6@zenn.net>

Hi All,

We'll be having conference call tomorrow at 8AM Pacific.  Please join!

On the docket:

* revised deliverables/schedule
* possible F2F workshop in January in conjunction with the TEG interim  
at Oracle


Call info:

US/Canada 866.411.0013, pin 0123586#
Outside US/Canada 734.615.7474, pin 0123586#


More Call options:

http://openliberty.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page#Developer_Phone_Calls




talk tomorrow,

asa


--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openliberty.org/pipermail/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org/attachments/20071205/b698fe4f/attachment.html 

From asa.openliberty at zenn.net  Tue Dec 11 07:48:17 2007
From: asa.openliberty at zenn.net (Asa Hardcastle)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:48:17 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] DST 2.1 / PP 1.1
Message-ID: <91874EFA-0FA7-427A-93A9-01DDF6A659A2@zenn.net>

Hi All,

I am in the process of implementing some client code for the Liberty  
Personal Profile service.   The schema refers to DST 1.1, yet there is  
DST 2.1 for ID-WSF 2.0.   Does anyone know the differences between DST  
1.1 and 2.1?   If I want to implement PP  1.1 (id-sis-pp:2005-05) I  
assume that I will need to follow DST1.1, requiring a partial  
implementation.  Is this true?

gracias,

asa


--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7



From asa.openliberty at zenn.net  Mon Dec 17 19:06:20 2007
From: asa.openliberty at zenn.net (Asa Hardcastle)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:06:20 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] ClientLib Call - 12/20 - 1pm pacific
Message-ID: <2E0B6DA8-3F3E-4AFC-8054-6C3C1F25D45D@zenn.net>

Hi All,

This week we'll be having a ClientLib phone call at 4pm eastern (1pm  
Pacific).

Topics:

* Personal Profile Service with DST 2.1
* ID-DAP over DST 2.1 - should we build this service now?
* Provisioning Service Client - what does it take, should we implement  
now?
* January IOP testing


NOTE: BRIDGE INFO IS DIFFERENT FOR THIS CALL, SINCE IT IS TIED TO THE  
TIME SLOT

+1-866-411-0013 (toll free US/Canada Only), +1-734-615-7474 (non-US/CA  
Users must use this number - system will not call out),
      Access code: 0113179#



talk to you then!

asa


--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7



From asa.openliberty at zenn.net  Tue Dec 18 18:24:28 2007
From: asa.openliberty at zenn.net (Asa Hardcastle)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:24:28 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] lu:Status
Message-ID: <FF341960-34D4-47A8-BFCE-3A2435A6265A@zenn.net>


In the idwsf utility v2.0 schema (urn:liberty:util:2006-08) the Status  
type appears to be defined so that it can have itself as a child  
element making this a completely legal XML fragment:

...
<Status code="Failed">
   <Status code="MissingSecurityMechIDElement"/>
   <Status code="MissingSelect"/>
</Status>
...

and actually:

<Status code="Failed">
   <Status code="MissingSecurityMechIDElement">
     <Status code="NoFunWithoutSechMechId"/>
     <Status code="BigTimeFailed">
         <Status code="ForSure" comment="Totally for sure"/>
     </Status>
   </Status>
   <Status code="MissingSelect"/>
</Status>



Am I reading this XSD properly?


     <xs:complexType name="StatusType">
         <xs:annotation>
             <xs:documentation>
                 A type that may be used for status codes.
             </xs:documentation>
         </xs:annotation>
         <xs:sequence>
             <xs:element ref="Status" minOccurs="0"  
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
         </xs:sequence>
         <xs:attribute name="code" type="xs:string" use="required"/>
         <xs:attribute name="ref" type="IDReferenceType"  
use="optional"/>
         <xs:attribute name="comment" type="xs:string" use="optional"/>
     </xs:complexType>

     <xs:element name="Status" type="StatusType">
         <xs:annotation>
             <xs:documentation>
                 A standard Status type
             </xs:documentation>
         </xs:annotation>
     </xs:element>


If I'm reading this properly, why was this decision made?


thanks in advance,

asa



--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7



From cantor.2 at osu.edu  Tue Dec 18 21:39:44 2007
From: cantor.2 at osu.edu (Scott Cantor)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:39:44 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] lu:Status
In-Reply-To: <FF341960-34D4-47A8-BFCE-3A2435A6265A@zenn.net>
References: <FF341960-34D4-47A8-BFCE-3A2435A6265A@zenn.net>
Message-ID: <4768AEA0.5040201@osu.edu>

Asa Hardcastle wrote:
> If I'm reading this properly, why was this decision made?

The unbounded cardinality seems a bit odd. SAML's status codes are nested, 
but only one at a time.

There's no material difference between nesting and using sequences of 
subcodes, and I've never really seen anybody nest them more than one layer deep.

It's all moot anyway...security software always sends one generic error code 
for everything, to prevent information leakage. All the arguments over 
status structure are kind of ironically stupid in light of that.

-- Scott


From conor.p.cahill at intel.com  Wed Dec 19 03:13:45 2007
From: conor.p.cahill at intel.com (Cahill, Conor P)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:13:45 -0800
Subject: [wsf-dev] lu:Status
In-Reply-To: <FF341960-34D4-47A8-BFCE-3A2435A6265A@zenn.net>
References: <FF341960-34D4-47A8-BFCE-3A2435A6265A@zenn.net>
Message-ID: <1B47D24854C7BC4FA8DA28BEBB59B0BA02C089EB@orsmsx419.amr.corp.intel.com>

You are reading this correctly.   The reason is to support multi-event
status
reports for partial success.    So the prototypical example would be:

	<status code="Partial">
		<status code="NotFound" ref="abc" />
		<status code="Success" ref="def" />
		<status code="Success" ref="ghi" />
		<status code="PermissionDenied" ref="jkl" />
	</status>

The top level status is required to be Success or Failed (or Partial for

multi-item transactions).  The Second level status is optional.  For 
single item transactions it would contain one status indicating the more
detailed failure code.  For multi-item transactions it would be as shown
above, with a ref or positional link to the respective item in the
request.

Conor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wsf-dev-bounces at lists.openliberty.org [mailto:wsf-dev-
> bounces at lists.openliberty.org] On Behalf Of Asa Hardcastle
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 9:24 PM
> To: wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
> Subject: [wsf-dev] lu:Status
> 
> 
> In the idwsf utility v2.0 schema (urn:liberty:util:2006-08) the Status
> type appears to be defined so that it can have itself as a child
> element making this a completely legal XML fragment:
> 
> ...
> <Status code="Failed">
>    <Status code="MissingSecurityMechIDElement"/>
>    <Status code="MissingSelect"/>
> </Status>
> ...
> 
> and actually:
> 
> <Status code="Failed">
>    <Status code="MissingSecurityMechIDElement">
>      <Status code="NoFunWithoutSechMechId"/>
>      <Status code="BigTimeFailed">
>          <Status code="ForSure" comment="Totally for sure"/>
>      </Status>
>    </Status>
>    <Status code="MissingSelect"/>
> </Status>
> 
> 
> 
> Am I reading this XSD properly?
> 
> 
>      <xs:complexType name="StatusType">
>          <xs:annotation>
>              <xs:documentation>
>                  A type that may be used for status codes.
>              </xs:documentation>
>          </xs:annotation>
>          <xs:sequence>
>              <xs:element ref="Status" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>          </xs:sequence>
>          <xs:attribute name="code" type="xs:string" use="required"/>
>          <xs:attribute name="ref" type="IDReferenceType"
> use="optional"/>
>          <xs:attribute name="comment" type="xs:string"
use="optional"/>
>      </xs:complexType>
> 
>      <xs:element name="Status" type="StatusType">
>          <xs:annotation>
>              <xs:documentation>
>                  A standard Status type
>              </xs:documentation>
>          </xs:annotation>
>      </xs:element>
> 
> 
> If I'm reading this properly, why was this decision made?
> 
> 
> thanks in advance,
> 
> asa
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
> Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wsf-dev mailing list
> Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
> http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-
> dev_lists.openliberty.org


From Jeff.Hodges at neustar.biz  Wed Dec 19 10:02:16 2007
From: Jeff.Hodges at neustar.biz (=JeffH)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:02:16 -0800
Subject: [wsf-dev] bug in openliberty.org wiki login
Message-ID: <47695CA8.4060106@neustar.biz>

It isn't obviously clear how to report this, but I'm guessing someone on this 
list can get it to the right person..

I attempted openid login on..

   http://openliberty.org/wiki/index.php/Special:OpenIDLogin

..using "=jeffh", and received this error msg..

Fatal error: Define Auth_OpenID_RAND_SOURCE as null to continue with an 
insecure random number generator. in 
/usr/local/lib/php/Auth/OpenID/CryptUtil.php on line 52


=JeffH



From eric at projectliberty.org  Wed Dec 19 11:14:09 2007
From: eric at projectliberty.org (Eric Tiffany)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:14:09 -0800
Subject: [wsf-dev] bug in openliberty.org wiki login
In-Reply-To: <47695CA8.4060106@neustar.biz>
Message-ID: <C38EAD81.27B7F%eric@projectliberty.org>

I have forwarded to the system maintainer.  I'm not sure where the OpenID
code originates, but I think it came from David Recordon (for use on the
Concordia wiki).

ET


On 12/19/07 10:02 AM, "=JeffH" <Jeff.Hodges at neustar.biz> wrote:

> It isn't obviously clear how to report this, but I'm guessing someone on this
> list can get it to the right person..
> 
> I attempted openid login on..
> 
>    http://openliberty.org/wiki/index.php/Special:OpenIDLogin
> 
> ..using "=jeffh", and received this error msg..
> 
> Fatal error: Define Auth_OpenID_RAND_SOURCE as null to continue with an
> insecure random number generator. in
> /usr/local/lib/php/Auth/OpenID/CryptUtil.php on line 52
> 
> 
> =JeffH
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wsf-dev mailing list
> Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
> http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org

-- 
____________________________________________________
Eric  Tiffany             |  eric at projectliberty.org
Interop Tech  Lead        |  +1 413-458-3743
Liberty Alliance          |  +1 413-627-1778 mobile





From subs at maerzcompany.com  Thu Dec 20 08:04:54 2007
From: subs at maerzcompany.com (Oliver Maerz)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:04:54 +0100
Subject: [wsf-dev] bug in openliberty.org wiki login
In-Reply-To: <47695CA8.4060106@neustar.biz>
References: <47695CA8.4060106@neustar.biz>
Message-ID: <A6FD4AD9-A036-4085-9AE3-A918D929799B@maerzcompany.com>

Sorry for the issues logging in with OpenID. It should work fine, now.
-Oliver

On 19.12.2007, at 19:02, =JeffH wrote:

> It isn't obviously clear how to report this, but I'm guessing  
> someone on this
> list can get it to the right person..
>
> I attempted openid login on..
>
>   http://openliberty.org/wiki/index.php/Special:OpenIDLogin
>
> ..using "=jeffh", and received this error msg..
>
> Fatal error: Define Auth_OpenID_RAND_SOURCE as null to continue with  
> an
> insecure random number generator. in
> /usr/local/lib/php/Auth/OpenID/CryptUtil.php on line 52
>
>
> =JeffH
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wsf-dev mailing list
> Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
> http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org



From asa.openliberty at zenn.net  Thu Dec 20 17:17:25 2007
From: asa.openliberty at zenn.net (Asa Hardcastle)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:17:25 -0500
Subject: [wsf-dev] today's dev call, notes
Message-ID: <4F2427BA-B4B7-486A-918F-7E5CEBB5DA25@zenn.net>

Hi All,

Here is a summary of today's call.

Attendees: Brett, Eric, Asa, Curtis

1. Personal Profile Service with DST 2.1
PP is mostly modeled, started with DST 1.1, migrating to DST 2.1.    
There are currently no known PP service implementations over ID-WSF 2  
using DST 2.1, but doing DST 2.1 will have other benefits, such as  
supporting ID-DAP.   PP provides personal information in a trusted web  
service - currently a hot topic.	

2. ID-DAP over DST 2.1 - should we build this service now?
ID-DAP specifications are located on the ID-SIS 1.0 specifications  
page, ID-DAP search in google does not bring up these pages because it  
is referred to as id-sis-dap.   Uses DST 2.1 (backwards compatible  
with 1.1 but with fewer features).  Looks like a fairly straight  
forward service client to implement.  Could test with Symlabs.

3. Provisioning Service Client - what does it take, should we  
implement  now?
The plan as of a few weeks ago was to deliver alpha with the "working"  
service being provisioning.   May still get a basic interaction up and  
running.  Conor has put up his server again so that this will be  
possible.  Probably not for Jan 1, however.   	liberty-iop.org has  
been renewed (fell out of domain reg. because was held by an old  
vendor), and now DNS records and listed contacts are being updated.

4. January IOP testing
During the TEG meeting at Oracke in Burlington Mass this January we  
will be doing some light interop testing.   Conor has said that he  
will be there and will test.  Looking for others who are interested.   
Eric (eric Tiffany <eric at projectliberty.org>) is going to be  
organizing the IOP.    The meeting is the 8th through the 10th of  
January.  We will try to be testing either the 9th/10th or 10th/11th  
based on everyone's flexibility and participation.

That's all for now folks!!

asa

--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7



From jason.rouault at hp.com  Sat Dec 22 06:04:59 2007
From: jason.rouault at hp.com (Rouault, Jason (Security Management))
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:04:59 +0000
Subject: [wsf-dev] today's dev call, notes
In-Reply-To: <4F2427BA-B4B7-486A-918F-7E5CEBB5DA25@zenn.net>
References: <4F2427BA-B4B7-486A-918F-7E5CEBB5DA25@zenn.net>
Message-ID: <C38343C8EF768045851A80E1001137ACF0D3E02788@G1W0486.americas.hpqcorp.net>

HP as a provisioning service up that we would look at using for #3.

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: wsf-dev-bounces at lists.openliberty.org [mailto:wsf-dev-bounces at lists.openliberty.org] On Behalf Of Asa Hardcastle
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 6:17 PM
To: wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
Subject: [wsf-dev] today's dev call, notes

Hi All,

Here is a summary of today's call.

Attendees: Brett, Eric, Asa, Curtis

1. Personal Profile Service with DST 2.1
PP is mostly modeled, started with DST 1.1, migrating to DST 2.1.
There are currently no known PP service implementations over ID-WSF 2
using DST 2.1, but doing DST 2.1 will have other benefits, such as
supporting ID-DAP.   PP provides personal information in a trusted web
service - currently a hot topic.

2. ID-DAP over DST 2.1 - should we build this service now?
ID-DAP specifications are located on the ID-SIS 1.0 specifications
page, ID-DAP search in google does not bring up these pages because it
is referred to as id-sis-dap.   Uses DST 2.1 (backwards compatible
with 1.1 but with fewer features).  Looks like a fairly straight
forward service client to implement.  Could test with Symlabs.

3. Provisioning Service Client - what does it take, should we
implement  now?
The plan as of a few weeks ago was to deliver alpha with the "working"
service being provisioning.   May still get a basic interaction up and
running.  Conor has put up his server again so that this will be
possible.  Probably not for Jan 1, however.     liberty-iop.org has
been renewed (fell out of domain reg. because was held by an old
vendor), and now DNS records and listed contacts are being updated.

4. January IOP testing
During the TEG meeting at Oracke in Burlington Mass this January we
will be doing some light interop testing.   Conor has said that he
will be there and will test.  Looking for others who are interested.
Eric (eric Tiffany <eric at projectliberty.org>) is going to be
organizing the IOP.    The meeting is the 8th through the 10th of
January.  We will try to be testing either the 9th/10th or 10th/11th
based on everyone's flexibility and participation.

That's all for now folks!!

asa

--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7


_______________________________________________
Wsf-dev mailing list
Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org