W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-privacy@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: [saag] Liking Linkability

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:30:55 -0400
Message-ID: <50818E4F.3040104@openlinksw.com>
To: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
CC: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>, "public-philoweb@w3.org" <public-philoweb@w3.org>, "public-identity@w3.org" <public-identity@w3.org>, "public-privacy@w3.org" <public-privacy@w3.org>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
On 10/19/12 9:31 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:
>> >So perhaps it is up to you to answer: why should I not want that?
> I am not saying you should not want that, I am saying that ACLs on the
> resources do not achieve unlinkability.
>

You keep on saying this but I simply don't agree. I gave you an example 
of a PKCS#12 file sent to you and a phone call during which its access 
password is exchanged. How do you the recipient of that data even 
understand the basis of the data access policy associated with the 
protected resource to which it will provide access? You don't know the 
nature of my data access policy. It doesn't say: grant access to the 
subject of this certificate. But seem to assume that it can only test 
that claim when you repeat the claim above.

You don't know the logic behind my assessment of your nebulous identity. 
You aren't in my head. The beauty of logic is that it allows me express 
a good chunk of what's in my head via notation.

A machine is linkable via DNS. A document is linkable via an HTTP URL, I 
am not linkable because I (like you and every other human) is endowed 
with cognitive powers and the ability to exploit temporality. We are 
really difficult to pin down, even more so with the explosion of 
networking devices, software etc.. that are loosely associated with us.

I can't stop you using the words, but I can assure you that you claims 
are refutable via logic.

What I would really like you to do is point us to an working example of 
something that meets your goals. Then we have something to compare. 
Bottom line, somebody will learn something useful and everyone will be 
ultimately be better off etc..

Links:

1. 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jul/27/heidegger-being-time-philosophy 

2. http://twitpic.com/1g03vo/full -- you can't really pin down the 
entity depicted in that image, contrary to what you might think due to 
Web perception illusion.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 17:31:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 19 October 2012 17:31:20 GMT