W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > September 2014

Re: Unlinkability. Re: Building Linked Data into the Core of the Web

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:57:18 -0400
Message-ID: <5421B47E.5030601@openlinksw.com>
To: public-webpayments@w3.org
On 9/23/14 1:12 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> On 2014-09-22 21:15, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 9/22/14 11:32 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-22 13:16, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>> On 9/22/14 2:31 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>>>>> I'm by no means an enemy to Linked Data, I just don't see what it
>>>>> would do for *conventional* payments except for introducing privacy
>>>>> and access control concerns.
>>>> Please take time to digest:
>>>> [1]
>>>> http://bit.ly/enterprise-identity-management-and-attribute-based-access-controls 
>>>> [2]
>>>> http://bit.ly/loosely-coupled-read-write-web-and-web-access-controls-using-webid 
>>>> .
>>>> You cannot make a moderately usable system without an identification
>>>> mechanism that isn't yet another data silo.
>>>> *conventional* payments are an application of data driven
>>>> identification, interaction, and management.
>>> My only ambition has been describing how you could "webify" an
>>> existing payment system,
>>> *without* changing data ownership, relationships, business-, trust-,
>>> or privacy-models.
>> You can't achieve that goal, in any non contradictory way, if you've
>> somehow convinced yourself that Linked Open Data and Webify aren't
>> inextricably linked.
>> "*without* changing data ownership, relationships, business-, trust-, or
>> privacy-models." is just another way of saying: structured data
>> representation + entity relationship semantics, without
>> data-silo-fication. That's exactly what RDF based Linked Open Data is
>> fundamentally about, period [1].
>>> Since the main problem with identity information is not the
>>> information itself but
>>> how it will be used after being submitted, it seems like a safe(r) bet
>>> minimizing
>>> exposure of such data.
>> Linked Open Data never means "uncontrolled or unconstrained access to
>> data" [1].
>>>    This is a corner-stone of my write-up.  Another example is
>>> FIDO which (at least on paper...) is the opposite to Linked Data since
>>> each site
>>> is supposed to be an identity silo.  In practice FIDO doesn't work as
>>> Google claims
>>> but that's altogether different discussion :-)
>> You can conditionally constrain access to data using data access 
>> policies.
> Yes, but if there is a way getting away from that by for example doing
> what my write-up does (encrypting the user's response and identity so 
> that
> it is only readable by the sole party that needs it), I think it is worth
> considering.

Yes, Encryption at Rest (EAR) and Linked Open Data aren't mutually 
exclusive. The "Open" in Linked Open Data isn't about being accessible 
to anyone, its actually about the use of open standards for structured 
data representation.

I have a Linked Open Data solution for file creation and sharing that 
supports AES based Encryption at REST. You can even mount Dropbox, 
OneDrive, Google Drive etc.. as storage locations for such encrypted data.

> Anyway, since my write-up is fairly complete, would it be possible to get
> concrete input on how it could be improved by adding Linked Data or do
> we always have to start from zero?

You don't have to start from zero. Linked Data handled the structured 
data representation. RDF handles the relations semantics that constitute 
the data.

> BTW, I think this is VERY important because I'm surely not the only one
> out there who do not necessarily understand what the WebPayments CG
> is saying. 

I am also confused by WebPayment CG too. I think I understand the goals, 
but I am quite unclear about the paths being chosen, at this embryonic 

In fact, I understand what you are pursuing with much more clarity, 
which is why I am spending time re., Linked Open Data clarification.

> Personally, I think it would be quite useful if somebody
> did a simple write-up of how *they* would address credit-card payments
> on the web because then we would have something to compare with. 

Yes. Or if you did something, I don't mind investing some time inserting 
segments where Linked Open Data is relevant etc.

> If we
> are lucky we may even find a way combining the old and the new :-)

Yes, that has to be the goal !!


> If nothing helps we will surely go into the black:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O1v_7T6p8U
> Cheers
> Anders
>> [1]
>> http://bit.ly/enterprise-identity-management-and-attribute-based-access-controls 
>> -- presentation that covers Linked Open Data and Attribute based Access
>> Controls working in tandem.
>> Kingsley
>>> Anders
>>>> Your point is inherently contradictory.
>>>> -- 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>>> Founder & CEO
>>>> OpenLink Software
>>>> Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
>>>> Personal Weblog 1:http://kidehen.blogspot.com
>>>> Personal Weblog 2:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>>> Twitter Profile:https://twitter.com/kidehen
>>>> Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
>>>> LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>>> Personal 
>>>> WebID:http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this


Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this

Received on Tuesday, 23 September 2014 17:57:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:39 UTC