Please find the performance comparison of Rampart Vs our solution at
http://wssecforaxis2.blogspot.com/2008/10/axis2-performance-with-ws-security.html
Thanks,
Saliya
Dittmann, Werner (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote:
Isuru,
thanks for the info. I've read the article - good stuff.
What I'm missing however - can you use this model also to create WSS
messages?
For my understanding:
For example a use case where the WsSec policy requires to first sign a
SOAP body then encrypt it. In this case you would need to first create
a full security header with Signature information, then modify the XML
document to replace the original Body with the encrypted Body.
Regards,
Werner
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ext Isuru Suriarachchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2008 1:46 PM
*To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Cc:* Dittmann, Werner (NSN - DE/Munich); Dennis Sosnoski; Colm O
hEigeartaigh; Werner Dittmann; jimmy Zhang; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Subject:* Re: WSS4J 1.5.4 Encryption Performance Question
Hi,
As paul has explained, we have developed a new WS-Security
implementation totally on Axiom. Our intention was to find a
solution for the well known performance drawbacks of Rampart.
According to performance results we obtained at the end of our
project, I can say that we have achieved our goal.
One of the main reasons for Rampart performacne drawbacks is the
usage of DOM as the object model in WSS4J and XML-Sec
implementations. As top Rampart layer uses Axiom, DOOM conversion
is done to convert the object model into DOM. So we have
implemented WS-Security and XML-Security entirely using Axiom and
that removes the requirement for DOOM. And also as Axiom is pull
based, it saves lot of memory when it comes to invalid messages if
they are rejected without building the whole message.
The other major problem with Rampart is that WSS4J is not
WS-SecurityPolicy aware. So the policy based validations of
secured SOAP messages are done after going through all the
WS-Security validations steps in WSS4J. This wastes both memory
and processing power if the message is not according to policy. In
order to remove this drawback, we have made our WS-Security
implementation policy aware. So the token proccessors can do
policy validations themselves.
In addition to above mentioned improvements, we have done various
code level improvements as well. Specially in invalid message
cases like DOS attacks, our implementation performs extremely
efficiently than Rampart. In other words, it rejects the messages
far earlier than Rampart.
I have explained our WS-Security model in the article at
http://wso2.org/library/articles/ws-security-processing-models-along-ws-securitypolicy-1.
Thanks,
Isuru
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Werner
A group of four students from the University of Morutuwa built a
WS-Security implementation architected directly on top of Axiom as
their final year project. Saliya (copied) is one of them, plus
Sameera, Isuru and Kalani. (Forgive me for excluding their
surnames).
They called this "Rampart2" as a code-name, but of course
naming would
need to be decided by the community. AFAIK they intend to
contribute
this to the WS project - and the contribution of
canonicalization into
Axiom is the first step they have taken.
My understanding is that they have submitted a paper on this
to the
IITC conference, so the paper will be published at the end of the
month. In the meantime, if you contact Saliya, I'm sure he can
share a
pre-press version. Saliya also mentioned he is planning to
share some
results in a blog.
Paul
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Dittmann, Werner (NSN -
DE/Munich)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> a link to this work would be nice :-) ,
>
> Regards,
> Werner
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ext Paul Fremantle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 8:37 AM
>> To: Dennis Sosnoski
>> Cc: Colm O hEigeartaigh; Werner Dittmann; jimmy Zhang;
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: Re: WSS4J 1.5.4 Encryption Performance Question
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>> I don't know about *just* canonicalization, but the team
built a
>> complete version of WS-Security on top of Axiom and in
their tests the
>> overall speedup ranged from 1.7-3x faster on various
scenarios and
>> message sizes.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Dennis Sosnoski
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>> > Hi Paul,
>> >
>> > I don't think that C14N support in Axiom is likely to be of
>> much direct
>> > benefit for performance. Axiom is slower and more
>> memory-intensive than
>> > standard DOM implementations when a document model needs to
>> be build - its
>> > advantage is that barring signing and such, most times you
>> can get away
>> > without the need for a document model - so I don't see that
>> using Axiom
>> > rather than a standard DOM is really going to help.
>> >
>> > The exception would be cases where only some tokens in the
>> header are being
>> > signed, which is actually the case that started this
>> discussion. If the
>> > Axiom+Rampart+WSS4J combination is smart enough to only
>> build the Axiom DOM
>> > for the header tokens that are being signed, this should
>> give much better
>> > performance than when the entire message has to be
>> converted to a DOM.
>> >
>> > I look forward to comparing the performance using Axiom
>> C14N vs. using
>> > standard DOM, and will give this a try as soon as it
>> becomes an option in
>> > the configuration.
>> >
>> > - Dennis
>> >
>> >
>> > Paul Fremantle wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> IMO
>> >>> C14N (in the case of signature) and DOM are the main
culprits for
>> >>> performance as far as WSS4J is concerned, not PKC.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I believe that some students have built out C14N directly
>> in Axiom and
>> >> are planning to contribute it to Axiom shortly. That
>> should make a big
>> >> difference.
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul Fremantle
>> Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2
>> Apache Synapse PMC Chair
>> OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>>
>> blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
<http://www.wso2.com>
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>
>
--
Paul Fremantle
Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2
Apache Synapse PMC Chair
OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
<http://www.wso2.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
