axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Isuru Suriarachchi" <isur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re: WSS4J 1.5.4 Encryption Performance Question
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:27:29 GMT
Hi Oliver,

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Oliver Wulff <oliver.wulff@zurich.ch>wrote:

> Hi Isuru
>
> What was the reason to use Axiom instead of the JAXB standard?


First I have to say that I'm not much familiar with JAXB standard. But as we
are developing a security module for Axis2, it is the best to use the same
object model as Axis2. Because it will avoid overheads of object model
conversions (like DOOM). Axis2 uses Axiom and also Axiom is pull based and
light weight. So it was a straight forward decision for us to use Axiom.

Thanks,
Isuru


>
>
> Thanks
> Oliver
>
>
>
>
>                      "Isuru
>                      Suriarachchi"            An:
> axis-dev@ws.apache.org
>                      <isurues@gmail.co        Kopie:    "Dittmann, Werner
> (NSN - DE/Munich)" <werner.dittmann@nsn.com>, "Dennis
>                      m>                        Sosnoski" <dms@sosnoski.com>,
> "Colm O hEigeartaigh" <coheigea@progress.com>, "Werner
>                                                Dittmann" <
> Werner.Dittmann@t-online.de>, "jimmy Zhang" <jzhang@ximpleware.com>,
>                      16.10.2008 13:46          smmtech@sbcglobal.net,
> wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org, saliya@wso2.com, sameera@wso2.com,
>                                                kalani@wso2.com,
> (Blindkopie: Oliver Wulff/CHK/External/Zurich)
>                                               Thema:    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 <pzfreo@gmail.com> 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)
>  <werner.dittmann@nsn.com> wrote:
>  > Paul,
>  >
>  > a link to this work would be nice :-) ,
>  >
>  > Regards,
>  > Werner
>  >
>  >> -----Original Message-----
>  >> From: ext Paul Fremantle [mailto:pzfreo@gmail.com]
>  >> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 8:37 AM
>  >> To: Dennis Sosnoski
>  >> Cc: Colm O hEigeartaigh; Werner Dittmann; jimmy Zhang;
>  >> smmtech@sbcglobal.net; wss4j-dev@ws.apache.org; saliya@wso2.com
>  >> 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
>  >> <dms@sosnoski.com> 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
>  >> paul@wso2.com
>  >>
>  >> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>  >>
>  >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wss4j-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>  >> For additional commands, e-mail: wss4j-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>
>
>
>  --
>  Paul Fremantle
>  Co-Founder and CTO, WSO2
>  Apache Synapse PMC Chair
>  OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>
>  blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org
>  paul@wso2.com
>
>  "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ******************* BITTE BEACHTEN *******************
> Diese Nachricht (wie auch allfällige Anhänge dazu) beinhaltet
> möglicherweise vertrauliche oder gesetzlich geschützte Daten oder
> Informationen. Zum Empfang derselben ist (sind) ausschliesslich die
> genannte(n) Person(en) bestimmt. Falls Sie diese Nachricht
> irrtümlicherweise erreicht hat, sind Sie höflich gebeten, diese unter
> Ausschluss jeder Reproduktion zu zerstören und die absendende Person
> umgehend zu benachrichtigen. Vielen Dank für Ihre Hilfe.
>
>

Mime
View raw message