The University of Cambridge's Raven service works
well enough for interactive logins using a web browser, but doesn't
(and was never intended to) support non-interactive authentication, or
authentication between one service and another, rather than between people
and services. Here's a set of suggestions for filling this
gap and for supporting general service-to-service communication - I happen to like these today but I'm making no promises that I
won't have changed my mind by tomorrow.
For 'proxied' or non-interactive authentication on behalf on individuals I'd recommend OAuth.
This is essentially a standardised protocol for establishing a token
that grants one service limited, delegated access in a user's name to
another service. There's a good example of how it could work in the Beginner’s Guide to OAuth – Part II : Protocol Workflow. OAuth is gaining significant traction in social networking applications.
For
service to service communication I'd recommend SSL/TLS using mutual
authentication by certificate. Since we are assuming that
authentication is required we should also assume that confidentiality is necessary so the protection offered by SSL/TLS seems appropriate.
Certificate trust could just be
established bilaterally between pairs of services, but the complexity
of this grows with the square of the number of services involved. Better would be to establish an in-house Public Key Infrastructure with a central in-house Certification
Authority (CA) that could issue certificates for this purpose. Some
difficult policy decisions will be needed about who is allowed to apply
for certificates in the name of which services, but once made it should be possible to largely automate the CA by providing a
Raven-authenticated web interface for certificate management. Note that these certificates would need to identify 'services',
rather than just computers, so the parties to a conversation could for example be the
'CS IP Register Database' and the 'Department of Important Studies
Network Management system'. We'd need to sort out a naming
convention. An important service provided by the CA would need to be the maintenance of a Certificate Revocation List.
Authorisation I'd leave to the services involved. Both OAuth and certificate authentication establish the 'identity' of a party in a conversation and it should be easy enough to use this identity within whatever authorisation system a service already uses. For example, Lookup could be adapted to allow certificate DNs to appear alongside user identifiers as members of groups used for access control.
Finally we need to identify protocols by which services can communicate. I suggest something lightweight and vaguely 'REST'ish. Authorities differ on what exactly REST requires, but here I just mean a basic CRUD interface carried over HTTP and mapped onto HTTP primitives PUT, GET, POST, DELETE, etc. Data should probably be serialised using simple XML, though other formats such as JSON are a possibility. Existing XML schema can be used where appropriate, for example the Atom Syndication Format can be used to represent lists (particularly search results), and the Atom Publishing Protocol is probably worth considering to support the creation and modification of resources (see Wikipedia for an introduction to Atom).
The advantage of this approach is that it provides a lightweight and technology neutral interface using tools (HTTP servers and clients) that are widely available and reasonably well understood. It even allows an amount of experimentation using nothing but a web browser. It also opens the possibility of in-browser manipulation of data, especially if results are available in JSON. Against this there's the need for an API design for each new service and the requirement for programming work at both the client and server ends. One way of supporting this is to distribute at least one example client library with each new API. An important selling point for this approach is the fact that it underpins almost all of the current 'cloud' offerings - see the Google Data Protocol, Amazon Web Services, Yahoo Social API, etc.
There are other posibilities for filling the various slots mentioned above - obvious ones being SSH to provide confidentiality and strong mutual authentication, and SOAP to provide interservice communication. I happen to think (today, as mentioned above) that the set I've listed here would currently provide the best solution. Why might be the subject of subsequent posts.
No comments:
Post a Comment