W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Matter of DN and what's possible

From: Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 20:02:10 +0000
Cc: "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0472EF47-738F-46CC-85EE-29C22C2D5B55@bbc.co.uk>
To: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>

On 9 Jan 2012, at 19:49, Peter Williams wrote:

> 
> 'The thing which has made WebID novel is that it marries a certificate and a dereferenceable URI (which isn't necessarily an http: or https: URI) in order for a relying party to be able to definitively say “yes, that URI uniquely identifies the holder of the certificate”.'
> 
> 
> 
> there is nothing novel about that (unless its becuase one changed a Name/DN string syntax into a URI syntax). That was done in 1986 in ISO (which by definition is a refinement of the working art). Arguably, it was all a rip off of the Xerox GrapeVine directory, which also had strong bind... over secure XNS net layer 2 cards, over which ran.... layer 4 crypto!

A DN can only be considered unique insofar as you trust the issuer, and while you could look it up in some directory service in order to obtain additional information (and allow others to do the same), the global X.500 directory tree never happened.

M.

-- 
Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space,
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E,
Project Office: Room 7083, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ
Received on Monday, 9 January 2012 20:05:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 9 January 2012 20:05:08 GMT