Re: Cert Ontology

On 19 March 2013 12:36, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

>
> On 19 Mar 2013, at 11:34, Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl> wrote:
>
> > W dniu 19.03.2013 11:02, Melvin Carvalho pisze:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 19 March 2013 10:54, Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl
> >> <mailto:ddooss@wp.pl>> wrote:
> >>
> >>    W dniu 19.03.2013 10:27, Melvin Carvalho pisze:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>        On 19 March 2013 10:20, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net
> >>        <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>
> >>        <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.__net
> >>        <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>             On 19 Mar 2013, at 09:49, Mo McRoberts
> >>        <Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk <mailto:Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk>
> >>             <mailto:Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk
> >>        <mailto:Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk>__>> wrote:
> >>
> >>              > curiously, the ASN.1 modules for RSA and DSA (in the
> >>        context of
> >>             PKIX) differ in terms of naming…
> >>              >
> >>              > where RSA speaks of 'modulus' and 'publicExponent', DSA
> is
> >>             exclusively 'p', 'q', and 'g' for the parameters and 'y'
> >>        for the key
> >>             itself.
> >>              >
> >>              > I can't help but wonder if consistency should perhaps
> >>        outweigh
> >>             friendlier naming (such that 'p' in an DSA key structure
> >>        maps to 'p'
> >>             in a set of RDF triples).
> >>              >
> >>              > rdfs:label and rdfs:comment within the ontology of
> >>        course can go
> >>             a long way in clarifying things…
> >>
> >>             This seems to be what the XMLSIG standard does
> >>
> >>        http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-__core/#sec-DSAKeyValue
> >>        <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/#sec-DSAKeyValue>
> >>
> >>
> >>        Nice find!
> >>
> >>        So we could simply go with g p q x y
> >>
> >>        They all seem to be : ds:CryptoBinary (which is the same as the
> RSA
> >>        exponent)
> >>
> >>    +1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>        So this I think would match to our use of xsd:hexBinary for all?
> >>
> >>    I do not think so. Some values should be xsd:int
> >>
> >>
> >> It would be nice, but i think xsd int can only store 32 bits or so, and
> >> we'll need at least 100+ for each of these.
> >>
> >> xsd:int I think can only safely be applied to an RSA exponent
> > OK, I don't focus on limits of xsd:int. So maybe unify all properties
> connected to DSA and RSA? There are two possibilities:
> > 1. use xsd:base64, pros: XSD datatype
> > 2. use ds:CryptoBinary, pros: compatibile with XMLSig. Note that this
> datatype is based on xsd:base64.
>
> I think xsd:base64 and xsd:hexBinary are interchangeable. Their domain is
> a binary sequence in each case. If we add this we would need to mention the
> equivalence as a note in the WebID over TLS spec, and we should improve our
> programs to accept both.
>
> If someone wants to put together the ontology in N3 for this and submitt
> it here for discussion we can then add it to the cert ontology when we get
> consensus.
>

I can have a go on this based on :

http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert.n3


>
> Henry
>
> PS. I have a bit of a flue so I can't do much just now


Get well soon!


> .
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dominik 'domel' Tomaszuk
> >
> >
> >>
> >>             Next one would have to specify what the types of the values
> >>        for each
> >>             of those relations are. Are they integers or hexBinaries,
> >>             hexBinaries for very long integers - since that is the only
> >>        way to
> >>             encode those in a hexadecidmal format that can save a bit
> >>        of space.
> >>             Ie: what is the domain of those values?
> >>
> >>              >
> >>              > M.
> >>              >
> >>              > On Mon 2013-Mar-18, at 19:02, Melvin Carvalho
> >>             <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.__com
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>              >
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >> On 18 March 2013 19:44, Henry Story
> >>        <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>
> >>             <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.__net
> >>        <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>>> wrote:
> >>              >>
> >>              >> On 18 Mar 2013, at 18:08, Melvin Carvalho
> >>             <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.__com
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>              >>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> On 17 March 2013 22:31, Henry Story
> >>        <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>
> >>             <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.__net
> >>        <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>>> wrote:
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> On 17 Mar 2013, at 21:56, Melvin Carvalho
> >>             <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.__com
> >>        <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert
> >>              >>>>
> >>              >>>> "The modulus of an RSA public and private key. Or the
> >>        modulus
> >>             of a DSA Key."
> >>              >>>>
> >>              >>>> Yet there is no class for a DSA public key.
> >>              >>>>
> >>              >>>> It would be great if this could be added as I'm
> currently
> >>             looking into an integration between WebID and a payments
> >>        system that
> >>             uses DSA.
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> Sounds like a good idea. Would be worth opening an
> >>        issue for.
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> Thanks for the advice, Henry.  I've opened an issue.
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> Could we break down what needs to be done to get this
> >>        actioned,
> >>             are there any bottle necks?
> >>              >>
> >>              >> There is probably very little to do. One needs to look
> >>        at how
> >>             DSA keys can be described, write out those relations,
> >>        verify them,
> >>             and then add them to the ontology.
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Ah good.
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Well as you know, RSA keys are described as follows:
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Private key description: (n, d) is the (modulus,
> >>        private key
> >>             exponent)
> >>              >> Public key description:  (n, e) is the (modulus, public
> key
> >>             exponent)
> >>              >>
> >>              >> In DSA as per:
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Private key description: (x, g, p, q) is the (private
> key,
> >>             generator, modulus, sub-group order)
> >>              >> Public key description: (y, g, p, q) is the (public key,
> >>             generator, modulus, sub-group order)
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Source:
> >>
> https://www.dlitz.net/__software/pycrypto/api/current/__Crypto.PublicKey.DSA._DSAobj-__class.html
> >>        <
> https://www.dlitz.net/software/pycrypto/api/current/Crypto.PublicKey.DSA._DSAobj-class.html
> >
> >>              >> Source:
> >>
> https://www.dlitz.net/__software/pycrypto/api/current/__Crypto.PublicKey.DSA-module.__html
> >>        <
> https://www.dlitz.net/software/pycrypto/api/current/Crypto.PublicKey.DSA-module.html
> >
> >>              >>
> >>              >> So I think the naming is doable.  To start with what do
> you
> >>             think of the terms:
> >>              >>
> >>              >> g=generator
> >>              >> p=modulus
> >>              >> q=subGroupOrder
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> Henry
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>> Social Web Architect
> >>              >>> http://bblfish.net/
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>>
> >>              >>
> >>              >> Social Web Architect
> >>              >> http://bblfish.net/
> >>              >>
> >>              >>
> >>              >
> >>              >
> >>              >
> >>              >
> >>              > --
> >>              > Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development,
> >>              > Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51
> 1DA,
> >>              > Room 7066, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ,
> >>              > 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E
> >>              >
> >>              >
> >>              >
> >>              > -----------------------------
> >>              > http://www.bbc.co.uk
> >>              > This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
> >>              > may contain personal views which are not the views of
> >>        the BBC
> >>             unless specifically stated.
> >>              > If you have received it in
> >>              > error, please delete it from your system.
> >>              > Do not use, copy or disclose the
> >>              > information in any way nor act in reliance on it and
> >>        notify the
> >>             sender
> >>              > immediately.
> >>              > Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
> >>              > sent or received.
> >>              > Further communication will signify your consent to
> >>              > this.
> >>              > -----------------------------
> >>
> >>             Social Web Architect
> >>        http://bblfish.net/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    --
> >>    Dominik Tomaszuk
> >>    Research Fellow
> >>    University of Bialystok
> >>    Poland
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dominik Tomaszuk
> > Research Fellow
> > University of Bialystok
> > Poland
> >
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 19 March 2013 11:50:03 UTC