Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

W3C Recommends XML Signature Syntax

Posted by michael on from the sealed-with-a-kiss dept.

__past__ writes: "The W3C released a recommendation on XML Signature Syntax and Processing. The interesting point is not only that this is quite an important step for secure XML processing (esp. with regarding to web services), but also because there are some possibly ugly patent issues."

5 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. An Introduction to XML Signatures (xml.com) by ditoudi · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you want more information about XML Signature, just check this article
    http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2001/08/08/xmldsig.html

  2. Re:scary by chrisP_999 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think there's a note out there saying that royalty free (rf) licensing should be the "preferred" method.

  3. Re:what made the web work by rootmonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hmmm here is quick course That_Hard

    XML is simpler than HTML.

    The new standard released is to make XML secure, since before this there is no guidlines for securing XML data. Think of it as https.

    --

    Yes but every time I try to see it your way, I get a headache.
  4. Re:what made the web work by ichimunki · · Score: 3, Informative

    What a load. HTTPS is a transport protocol. This spec is about signing stuff so that it can be authenticated against a key, not encrypting it during transmission.

    --
    I do not have a signature
  5. Re:Conflict of interest? by euphline · · Score: 2, Informative
    So, as I understand it, a working group (WG) member creates a standard and then says, "Oh, hey, great standard guys, but now you're all going to have to pay me for it".

    The problem is... if you look at the patents that are applicable in this case... no xml signature standard would EVER not violate them.

    I'll go a long way towards talking about W3C patent reform... but this one happens to be a case of needing USPTO reform.

    -jbn