[flagged]
Security issues with electronic invoices
11–20 of 67 posts
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#12[flagged]
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#13A standard for invoices seems like something that an accounting body should create that is optional for businesses, not something mandatory created by the government. People will generally follow an optional standard to make their own lives easier, but a mandatory one introduces a compliance middleman into the invoicing process.
The accountancy bodies are national so it would end up with one standard per country. But yea should probably not be mandatory.
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#14Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#15Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#16Aside from the security issue, it seems like an awful idea for a government (or governments, in this case) to say 'hey, you need to follow this standard for invoicing. But also, you have to pay to see the entire standard'.. almost feels like extortion a bit
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#17Any reason why they wouldn’t use EDIFACT instead?
As having implemented EDIFACT parsers and translation layers, Universal Business Language (Oasis UBL) is a bliss to work with. Yes, it's a big standard and looks scary when starting out with it, but it is very well designed for a complicated world.
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#18A standard for invoices seems like something that an accounting body should create that is optional for businesses, not something mandatory created by the government. People will generally follow an optional standard to make their own lives easier, but a mandatory one introduces a compliance middleman into the invoicing process.
If you want something to work in multiple countries, you have little choice. Otherwise you get x standards
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#19A standard for invoices seems like something that an accounting body should create that is optional for businesses, not something mandatory created by the government. People will generally follow an optional standard to make their own lives easier, but a mandatory one introduces a compliance middleman into the invoicing process.
Electronic invoicing makes the live of the receiver easier. The sender has to adapt the standard.
Besides, many standards have been created over the past 20 years, yet most invoices are still only sent as PDF.
Re: Security issues with electronic invoices
#20This talk seems set out to prove that "XML is Bad". Yes XML-DSig isn't great with XPaths, but most of these attack vectors has been known for 10 years. There is probably a reason why the vulnerabilities found where in software not commonly used, e.g. SAP. Many of the things possible with XML and UBL simply isn't available in protobuf, json. How would you digitally sign a Json document and embed the signature in the document?
The article nor the talk appear to reference the XML standard that EN 16931 is built upon: Universal Business Language, https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=... - which is freely available. Examples can be found here: https://github.com/Tradeshift/tradeshift-ubl-examples/tree/m... . It is a good standard and yes it's complex, but it is not complicated by accident. I would any day recommend UBL over IDOC, Tradacom, EDIFACT and the likes.