• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: Re: Extra headaches of securing XML
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:50:13 -0800
• Cc: "'Hunsberger, Peter'" <Peter.Hunsberger@s...>,xml-dev@l...,Gerben Rampaart <VisualBasic@H...>
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F547@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F547@h...>

On Mar 30, 2004, at 8:40 AM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> It isn't a very good article.

It could have been worse.  His editor was telling him to write that XML 
was inherently less secure because it was textual and therefore more 
readable.  Yow.  With respect to Web Services, I think the key point is 
indeed that all this WS-mumble stuff is becoming frighteningly complex 
and I'd bet a zillion bucks that there are awful vulnerabilities 
lurking in the cracks where nobody could possibly have thought to look. 
  -Tim

smime.p7s

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Extra headaches of securing XML
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• References:
  • RE: Extra headaches of securing XML
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Extra headaches of securing XML
• Next by Date: Re: Extra headaches of securing XML
• Previous by thread: RE: Extra headaches of securing XML
• Next by thread: Re: Extra headaches of securing XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread