Scott,
>> A drawback with enveloped signatures is that they clobber
>> messages which is likely to be the reason why SOAP do not use such.
>No, I think SOAP uses them detached because SOAP views the signing
>aspect as a separate "module" from the core spec. I don't think SAML's
>use of signing is quite so separate. But it could be, it's really just a
>matter of what seems appropriate for the use case.
Actually, my question was really about SAML, Dsig and SOAP bindings,
that "seem" a bit non-conformat versus the SOAP Dsig Note.
In addition I cannot help thinking that external signature containers
are easier to use as they do not require modifications to the documents to be
signed. None of the S/MIME-ways of signing require such measures either.
In OBI V4 we will use SOAP's way of signing for SOAP-enveloped
messages. The reason for this is that we believe that interoperability
should gain from that, not that it is technically superior. This is our
number #1 priority as OBI is designed to be fully plug-and-play.
Anders
