Welcome!

Microservices Expo Authors: Stackify Blog, Aruna Ravichandran, Dalibor Siroky, Kevin Jackson, PagerDuty Blog

Related Topics: Microservices Expo

Microservices Expo: Article

WS Security Performance

Secure Conversation versus the X509 Profile

The WS Secure Conversation specification describes a mechanism letting multiple parties establish a context (using the WS Trust Request Security Token standard) and secure subsequent SOAP exchanges. Each WS Secure Conversation session has an associated shared secret. Instead of using this shared secret directly to sign and encrypt the conversation's messages, symmetric keys are derived from the secret itself. Deriving new keys for each message and different keys for signature and encryption limits the amount of data that an attacker can analyze in attempting to compromise the context.

Derived Key Tokens are tokens in a SOAP Security Header that refer to the derived keys. Using the context's shared secret and hints provided by the Derived Key Token element, the message's recipient derives the key used by the requestor either to verify a signature or decrypt parts of the message.

How Derived Key Tokens are used is best understood by looking at Listing #1, which illustrates a SOAP message signed and encrypted as detailed by the WS Secure Conversation specification. Notice how the element Header/Security/SecurityContextToken refers to the pre-established WS Secure Conversation context. Both parties participating in this message know the shared secret associated with the context. Two Derived Key Tokens are declared in the Security header. Both of those Derived Key Tokens refer to the same Security Context Token but the associated derived keys are different as per the derivation Nonces provided. The element Header/Security/Signature/KeyInfo refers to one of the derived keys and the Body/EncryptedData/KeyInfo refers to the other.

Derived Key Tokens Beyond Secure Conversation Contexts
The Derived Key Token mechanism described in WS Secure Conversation relies on a shared secret. This shared secret doesn't have to be in the form of a WS Secure Conversation context key. It can be as simple as a password (think UsernameToken) or a Kerberos ticket (think Kerberos BinarySecurityTokens). Any form of shared secret that can be mapped to a security token can effectively serve as the basis for deriving keys (although for an implementation to interoperate easily one should stick to the derivations defined by standards). For example, the Web Services Security UsernameToken Profile 1.1 specification describes a mechanism where the password associated with a username is used to derive a secret key to protect the integrity or confidentiality of the message content. This has the advantage of not requiring that the context be pre-established.

Another interesting approach to key derivation that avoids the offline establishment of a context is to derive keys on an EncryptedKeyToken. In this case, the requestor makes up a secret, encrypts it, and sends it to the recipient. This generated secret is shared between the requestor and the recipient and only the recipient can decrypt it. Of course, this shared secret alone can't be used for authentication purposes but derived keys based on such a shared secret can still be useful for encrypting a message and signing it for ensuring integrity. The WS Security 1.1 spec also allows subsequent messages to refer to an encrypted key defined in a previous message. Deriving keys based on this previous secret has the advantage of avoiding the expensive operation associated with deciphering a new encrypted key for each message. Of course, any use of EncryptedKeyTokens requires the initiator to know the X509 cert of the recipient to encrypt the initial key.

WS Security Performance
Messages secured on a pre-established WS Secure Conversation are processed by both parties using symmetrical cryptography only. This contrasts with other mechanisms such as the ones described in the X509 Token Profile specification where XML digital signatures are based on an X509 BinarySecurityToken and where encryption is based on a key that is itself encrypted using the recipient's public key. In that case, both signature and encryption operations require using asymmetrical cryptography.

Your CPU will tell you that cryptography is generally expensive and that asymmetrical cryptography is extremely expensive. So it's reasonable to expect WS Secure Conversation-based WS Security to be processed at faster rate than X509-based WS Security. The question is how significant this performance advantage is in a real-world deployment burdened by other overheads such as XML processing.

Secure Conversation vs. X509 Profile Benchmark
As illustrated in Figure 1, an XML gateway is introduced between a number of WS requestors and a WS server. This XML gateway gets security-decorated SOAP requests coming in from clients, deciphers them, and verifies the digital signature. The XML gateway then forwards the request to the back-end Web Service that returns a SOAP response. This response is then secured by the XML gateway (XML encryption and signature) before it's forwarded back to the original requestor. The response security is achieved using the same mechanism used to secure the request.

The WS Security method used for securing these SOAP messages is dictated by a WS Policy document published by the XML gateway. By altering this policy document we can switch between messages secured using Derived Key Tokens associated with a WS Secure Conversation session versus messages secured using an X509 token profile mechanism. The key derivation algorithm used by the XML gateway is the standard PSHA-1 described in the WS Secure Conversation specification.

In this scenario the number of messages per second the gateway was able to process for each of these WS Security mechanisms was measured. Listings 1 and 2 illustrate sample messages processed by the XML gateway for Derived Key Tokens and X509 respectively. Also measured was the number of requests per time unit processed by this same gateway in a case where messages didn't involved WS Security at all and were exchanged through SSL as well as a benchmark measurement taken with no security policy present al all.

On the requestor side, five systems running Apache benchmark were simultaneously sending pre-formatted SOAP requests to the XML gateway inside an isolated network. The gateway was deployed as a single node. On the back-end, an Apache server returned static unsecured SOAP responses. In these tests, all of the WS Security processing was delegated to the gateway, both the requestors and the back-end service were sending hard-coded SOAP messages; this ensures that we focus the bottleneck and isolate the real throughput of the XML gateway with regards to WS Security processing as much as possible.

Benchmark Results
The numbers shown (see Table 1) are for messages processed per second by the single node XML gateway (note that each request and response is processed as separate messages). As you can see, when processing messages secured using WS Secure Conversation, the XML gateway was able to handle as many as 798 messages per second as compared to 352 messages per second for X509-based signatures and encryption. The anticipated performance gain predicted is very significant; the throughput more than doubles for the single XML gateway node.

To provide context the number of messages the same XML gateway processed when security was based purely on transport mechanisms (in this case SSL) was also measured. In that case, the single node XML gateway processed 2,918 messages a second.

Summary
Using a purely symmetric crypto approach to WS Security as is possible with Derived Key Tokens produces a processing performance advantage over WS Security achieved through the X509 profile that relies on public key crypto. This performance gain has the potential to translate into significant throughput gains in a production environment where WS Security processing is involved in a bottleneck. Derived Key Tokens are also a practical approach to WS Security; they can be used in conjunction with a number of different mechanisms such as Kerberos, passwords, and WS Secure Conversations, and they don't need a public key infrastructure.

However, the mechanisms described in the X509 token profile should by no means be regarded as inferior. The public key aspects of the X509 token profile provide functional advantages over WS Security relying exclusively on Derived Key Tokens.

Indeed, the performance advantage provided by signing and encrypting messages using exclusively symmetrical crypto comes at a price. Because the messages are signed with something based on a shared secret, those signatures can't form the basis of non-repudiation. Both parties knowing the shared secret can produce such signatures. Conversely, when message signatures are based on an X509 token, they prove the possession of a private key to which the recipient doesn't have access; the signing party can't claim that the other party forged his or her signature. Obviously, asymmetrical crypto is just one piece of the complicated non-repudiation puzzle, but an essential one nevertheless.

Another advantage of using X509 mechanisms over session-based security is that digital certificates and their associated private keys typically have a longer lifecycle than security contexts such as WS Secure Conversation sessions or Kerberos tickets. The ephemeral nature of security contexts restricts (if not eliminates) the ability to audit a message offline long after it's been processed. Once a session has expired, and the associated shared secret is forgotten, encryption can no longer be undone and signatures become meaningless. On the other hand, messages including signatures and encrypted elements that refer to X509 certificates can be saved for later auditing; they can be decrypted later, their signatures can be verified.

More Stories By Francois Lascelles

As Layer 7’s Chief Architect, Francois Lascelles guides the solutions architecture team and aligns product evolution with field trends. Francois joined Layer 7 in the company’s infancy – contributing as the first developer and designing the foundation of Layer 7’s Gateway technology. Now in a field-facing role, Francois helps enterprise architects apply the latest standards and patterns. Francois is a regular blogger and speaker and is also co-author of Service-Oriented Infrastructure: On-Premise and in the Cloud, published by Prentice Hall. Francois holds a Bachelor of Engineering degree from Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal and a black belt in OAuth. Follow Francois on Twitter: @flascelles

More Stories By Aaron Flint

Over the past 10 years, Aaron Flint has worked, in increasingly senior positions, to ensure quality of enterprise-level server applications. He joined Layer 7 Technologies to lead the QA department early on and has been helping to build and release a quality SecureSpan product line since then.

Comments (2) View Comments

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.


Most Recent Comments
SYS-CON Australia News Desk 04/17/06 12:10:39 PM EDT

The WS Secure Conversation specification describes a mechanism letting multiple parties establish a context (using the WS Trust Request Security Token standard) and secure subsequent SOAP exchanges. Each WS Secure Conversation session has an associated shared secret. Instead of using this shared secret directly to sign and encrypt the conversation's messages, symmetric keys are derived from the secret itself. Deriving new keys for each message and different keys for signature and encryption limits the amount of data that an attacker can analyze in attempting to compromise the context.

SYS-CON India News Desk 04/17/06 11:20:19 AM EDT

The WS Secure Conversation specification describes a mechanism letting multiple parties establish a context (using the WS Trust Request Security Token standard) and secure subsequent SOAP exchanges. Each WS Secure Conversation session has an associated shared secret. Instead of using this shared secret directly to sign and encrypt the conversation's messages, symmetric keys are derived from the secret itself. Deriving new keys for each message and different keys for signature and encryption limits the amount of data that an attacker can analyze in attempting to compromise the context.

@MicroservicesExpo Stories
How is DevOps going within your organization? If you need some help measuring just how well it is going, we have prepared a list of some key DevOps metrics to track. These metrics can help you understand how your team is doing over time. The word DevOps means different things to different people. Some say it a culture and every vendor in the industry claims that their tools help with DevOps. Depending on how you define DevOps, some of these metrics may matter more or less to you and your team.
For many of us laboring in the fields of digital transformation, 2017 was a year of high-intensity work and high-reward achievement. So we’re looking forward to a little breather over the end-of-year holiday season. But we’re going to have to get right back on the Continuous Delivery bullet train in 2018. Markets move too fast and customer expectations elevate too precipitously for businesses to rest on their laurels. Here’s a DevOps “to-do list” for 2018 that should be priorities for anyone w...
If testing environments are constantly unavailable and affected by outages, release timelines will be affected. You can use three metrics to measure stability events for specific environments and plan around events that will affect your critical path to release.
In a recent post, titled “10 Surprising Facts About Cloud Computing and What It Really Is”, Zac Johnson highlighted some interesting facts about cloud computing in the SMB marketplace: Cloud Computing is up to 40 times more cost-effective for an SMB, compared to running its own IT system. 94% of SMBs have experienced security benefits in the cloud that they didn’t have with their on-premises service
DevOps failure is a touchy subject with some, because DevOps is typically perceived as a way to avoid failure. As a result, when you fail in a DevOps practice, the situation can seem almost hopeless. However, just as a fail-fast business approach, or the “fail and adjust sooner” methodology of Agile often proves, DevOps failures are actually a step in the right direction. They’re the first step toward learning from failures and turning your DevOps practice into one that will lead you toward even...
DevOps is under attack because developers don’t want to mess with infrastructure. They will happily own their code into production, but want to use platforms instead of raw automation. That’s changing the landscape that we understand as DevOps with both architecture concepts (CloudNative) and process redefinition (SRE). Rob Hirschfeld’s recent work in Kubernetes operations has led to the conclusion that containers and related platforms have changed the way we should be thinking about DevOps and...
While walking around the office I happened upon a relatively new employee dragging emails from his inbox into folders. I asked why and was told, “I’m just answering emails and getting stuff off my desk.” An empty inbox may be emotionally satisfying to look at, but in practice, you should never do it. Here’s why. I recently wrote a piece arguing that from a mathematical perspective, Messy Desks Are Perfectly Optimized. While it validated the genius of my friends with messy desks, it also gener...
The goal of Microservices is to improve software delivery speed and increase system safety as scale increases. Microservices being modular these are faster to change and enables an evolutionary architecture where systems can change, as the business needs change. Microservices can scale elastically and by being service oriented can enable APIs natively. Microservices also reduce implementation and release cycle time and enables continuous delivery. This paper provides a logical overview of the Mi...
The next XaaS is CICDaaS. Why? Because CICD saves developers a huge amount of time. CD is an especially great option for projects that require multiple and frequent contributions to be integrated. But… securing CICD best practices is an emerging, essential, yet little understood practice for DevOps teams and their Cloud Service Providers. The only way to get CICD to work in a highly secure environment takes collaboration, patience and persistence. Building CICD in the cloud requires rigorous ar...
The enterprise data storage marketplace is poised to become a battlefield. No longer the quiet backwater of cloud computing services, the focus of this global transition is now going from compute to storage. An overview of recent storage market history is needed to understand why this transition is important. Before 2007 and the birth of the cloud computing market we are witnessing today, the on-premise model hosted in large local data centers dominated enterprise storage. Key marketplace play...
The cloud revolution in enterprises has very clearly crossed the phase of proof-of-concepts into a truly mainstream adoption. One of most popular enterprise-wide initiatives currently going on are “cloud migration” programs of some kind or another. Finding business value for these programs is not hard to fathom – they include hyperelasticity in infrastructure consumption, subscription based models, and agility derived from rapid speed of deployment of applications. These factors will continue to...
Some people are directors, managers, and administrators. Others are disrupters. Eddie Webb (@edwardawebb) is an IT Disrupter for Software Development Platforms at Liberty Mutual and was a presenter at the 2016 All Day DevOps conference. His talk, Organically DevOps: Building Quality and Security into the Software Supply Chain at Liberty Mutual, looked at Liberty Mutual's transformation to Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, and DevOps. For a large, heavily regulated industry, this task ...
Following a tradition dating back to 2002 at ZapThink and continuing at Intellyx since 2014, it’s time for Intellyx’s annual predictions for the coming year. If you’re a long-time fan, you know we have a twist to the typical annual prediction post: we actually critique our predictions from the previous year. To make things even more interesting, Charlie and I switch off, judging the other’s predictions. And now that he’s been with Intellyx for more than a year, this Cortex represents my first ...
"Grape Up leverages Cloud Native technologies and helps companies build software using microservices, and work the DevOps agile way. We've been doing digital innovation for the last 12 years," explained Daniel Heckman, of Grape Up in this SYS-CON.tv interview at 21st Cloud Expo, held Oct 31 – Nov 2, 2017, at the Santa Clara Convention Center in Santa Clara, CA.
The Toyota Production System, a world-renowned production system is based on the "complete elimination of all waste". The "Toyota Way", grounded on continuous improvement dates to the 1860s. The methodology is widely proven to be successful yet there are still industries within and tangential to manufacturing struggling to adopt its core principles: Jidoka: a process should stop when an issue is identified prevents releasing defective products
We seem to run this cycle with every new technology that comes along. A good idea with practical applications is born, then both marketers and over-excited users start to declare it is the solution for all or our problems. Compliments of Gartner, we know it generally as “The Hype Cycle”, but each iteration is a little different. 2018’s flavor will be serverless computing, and by 2018, I mean starting now, but going most of next year, you’ll be sick of it. We are already seeing people write such...
Defining the term ‘monitoring’ is a difficult task considering the performance space has evolved significantly over the years. Lately, there has been a shift in the monitoring world, sparking a healthy debate regarding the definition and purpose of monitoring, through which a new term has emerged: observability. Some of that debate can be found in blogs by Charity Majors and Cindy Sridharan.
It’s “time to move on from DevOps and continuous delivery.” This was the provocative title of a recent article in ZDNet, in which Kelsey Hightower, staff developer advocate at Google Cloud Platform, suggested that “software shops should have put these concepts into action years ago.” Reading articles like this or listening to talks at most DevOps conferences might make you think that we’re entering a post-DevOps world. But vast numbers of organizations still struggle to start and drive transfo...
Let's do a visualization exercise. Imagine it's December 31, 2018, and you're ringing in the New Year with your friends and family. You think back on everything that you accomplished in the last year: your company's revenue is through the roof thanks to the success of your product, and you were promoted to Lead Developer. 2019 is poised to be an even bigger year for your company because you have the tools and insight to scale as quickly as demand requires. You're a happy human, and it's not just...
"Opsani helps the enterprise adopt containers, help them move their infrastructure into this modern world of DevOps, accelerate the delivery of new features into production, and really get them going on the container path," explained Ross Schibler, CEO of Opsani, and Peter Nickolov, CTO of Opsani, in this SYS-CON.tv interview at DevOps Summit at 21st Cloud Expo, held Oct 31 – Nov 2, 2017, at the Santa Clara Convention Center in Santa Clara, CA.