Somehow, during the discussions of SPAM, anti-SPAM, Kennedy's bill,
invitations to testing webinars, etc., we must have lost track of Chris
Feahr's Registry authentication questions (below).  Though this is
indeed a "big can of worms," fortunately we have folks on board who take
special interest in such things -  namely, our friends from US NIST.
The OASIS ebXML Registry Technical Committee is also looking at these
kinds of problems within its Security Services sub-committee.

Maybe I can persuade Lisa Carnahan to take our requirements back to the
Security Services people.  Lisa is both a member of the OASIS ebXML
Registry TC and of our group, and she has volunteered to be our Registry
"expert" and co-author our working paper on "Discovery" of Healthcare
CPPs.

As an aside, Joe Rosmann has reminded me that there is an ebXML paper -
the ebXML Registry Security Proposal - that gives some background on
authentication, integrity and confidentiality with respect to the ebXML
Registry;  it's a little dated and rough, but still available at
http://www.ebxml.org/specs/secREG.pdf.

William J. Kammerer
Novannet, LLC.
Columbus, US-OH 43221-3859
+1 (614) 487-0320

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rachel Foerster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'joe mcverry'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WEDi/SNIP ID &
Routing'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 12 June, 2002 02:05 PM
Subject: RE: digital certificates for access to CPP repository

Joe,

I understand. On the other hand, how else would you authentic an entity
attempting to access a CPP reposistory? Furthermore, even assuming
authentication, it's not at all clear to me that all entities would want
their CPP info to be accessible to all parties accessing such a
registry. This is a big can of worms and without any business case and
business requirements, I believe that details of this type are much too
premature.

My concern is about the complexity that is ensuing as a result of these
discussions and that I don't believe this (CPP/A, registry, etc.) is at
all essential for health care to achieve compliance with HIPAA by the
various drop-dead dates.

Rachel

-----Original Message-----
From: joe mcverry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 9:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing'
Subject: Re: digital certificates for access to CPP repository

If authentication is in place then there should be no need to worry
about "digital certificates for access to CPP repository."

----- Original Message -----
From: "William J. Kammerer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, 11 June, 2002 04:18 PM
Subject: Re: digital certificates for access to CPP repository


In the current version of the OASIS ebXML Registry specification, there
are no provisions for confidentiality of Registry content. All content
submitted to the Registry may be discovered and read by any client -
which means anybody can find out that an entity is accessible via the
registry, and where their CPP is located.

On the other hand, only authorized submitters who have been
authenticated using digital signatures can publish data in the registry.
I am assuming that this means there exists a fine-grained mechanism
whereby only the owner (or his agent) of information (e.g., the CPP) can
submit or change his own information - as opposed to having to submit
his information through a central authority for inclusion in the
Registry.

The CPP owner may have some means of obfuscating his own CPP, or parts
thereof - revealing information only to authorized users-  since the CPP
itself could very well reside on his own server.

Of course, I'm making a lot of assumptions.  The details have to be
ferreted out by the folks responsible for the working paper on
"Discovery" of Healthcare CPPs: Peter Barry, Joe McVerry, and Dick
Brooks!  I think Joe only volunteered to look into UDDI.  That leaves
Peter and Dick to be the experts on the ebXML Registry.  Maybe I could
add Lisa Carnahan to the list, too. Does anyone else want to volunteer?

William J. Kammerer
Novannet, LLC.
Columbus, US-OH 43221-3859
+1 (614) 487-0320

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher J. Feahr, OD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, 10 June, 2002 06:31 PM
Subject: digital certificates for access to CPP repository

Dear Group:

I would like to know if we have agreement (or could agree) on the
following requirements regarding access to the CPP registry/repository
data:

1. Allow any party to access the CPP registry, thus obtaining the URL
that points to an entity's "repository" record(s).

2. Require a standard mechanism for entrance to the CPP repository
record that somehow looks for a valid digital ID certificate

If every CPP repository user was required to have a valid ID certificate
somewhere (e.g., the AMA/Verisign deal that was mentioned once) then
requiring that certificate as the "entry pass" to the repository would
seem to be a way to keep the riff-raff out. I think we may still need
ways to individually [further] secure sections of the repository record,
but would a dig. certificate be a reasonable way to secure the
repository front door? My suggestion would be to include a data element
in the repository (perhaps another URL) that pointed to a default
"access denied" message created by the repository record owner. (I guess
in the absence of an entity-specific "access denied" message that
provided an alt. means like a cust. service phone #, the user would
simply get a "page not found" error)

More questions (assuming that we do want to secure the front door with a
certificate):

  1.. How tough are these to obtain? Could Mr. Hacker apply for one and
thereby have the keys to the kingdom?
  2.. Are there standard protocols (possibly in the ebXML CPP
specifications) for implementing this type of auto-authentication when
you attempt to access a URL?
  3.. How many data elements would be necessary in the repository record

to handle auto-auth... and what would they be called?

Regards,
Chris

Christopher J. Feahr, OD
http://visiondatastandard.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268




discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual
participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of
Directors nor WEDI SNIP.  If you wish to receive an official opinion, post
your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at
http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/.
Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is
specifically prohibited.

Reply via email to