Web Services Design Question - Logging messages

We had a debate in the office with respect to audit logging of messages received and sent via Web Services.

I am of the opinion that the entire SOAP message should not be logged in the application audit logs unless there is a requirement that states that this is required. Only salient elements of the request need to be part of the audit log as this provides evidence that is required in the audit trail.

My reasons are: (1) Audit logs by definition are always turned on and should not be turned off. So if we take the decision of logging the entire message for audit trail they will be turned on always and can cause a huge performance impact during p开发者_StackOverflow中文版roduction runs (particularly during peak loads) (2) If the business/technical requirement does not explicitly state this as a requirement this is an un-necessary overhead. If information is required, the run-time engines tracing capability can be used to turn on/off to get the SOAP messages.

What are the generic thoughts of experts in this space.

Thanks, Manglu

---

Don't confuse auditing with logging. If there is a requirement for auditing then you need to perform auditing.

Since auditing is typically required for legal or policy reasons you need to understand what actions and activities need to be logged as well as what data needs to be logged. This is not a technical decision but needs to be determined by the business. Once you have your requirements then you can project your audit volumes and design your application to take these into account (e.g. performance, storage, etc.).

If you think you have an auditing requirement but it is not explicitly stated then ask for clarification. You don't want to find this out only after you have been sued.

If you truly have an auditing requirement then you should probably audit the entire soap request message as well as the response. This is to support non-repudiation.

As an example let's say that you have a health care application and only audit the key information: personal identifiers (e.g. SSN) and whether the patient is allergic to penicillin. But what happens when a patient dies because is allergic to penicillin was false when it shouldn't have been? The audit logs are checked and you say that you were sent a value of false for that patient but the other system says that they actually sent you a value of true and that you must have a problem with your system. In this scenario what you need to do is to show the exact message that was sent to the web service and that because it was signed by the service consumer you can prove that it came from them and also prove that the data in the message is correct. Then you would follow that information through your system via the audit logs.

Of course, it all goes back to the requirements; if the business finds that only auditing x and y satisfies whatever legislation or policies then go with that.

---

I know from experience that logging it all can lead to pretty huge files or a lot of data if kept on database. It's very helpful during development time, but in production it becomes a problem. I would suggest logging as you said. But be aware of a situation I came across: We were providing a webservice for 3rd-party companies use. When there's some dispute about who's fault is the error. We needed the exact SOAP message to prove that it wasn't our fault. I don't know if this scenario applies to you.