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

Re: Slash URIs and WebID Experiment

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:56:27 +0100
Cc: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>, public-xg-webid@w3.org
Message-Id: <C872C805-3348-452A-9B32-5AAF630805E7@bblfish.net>
To: Jürgen Jakobitsch <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at>

On 11 Jan 2012, at 15:47, Jürgen Jakobitsch wrote:

> hi,
> 
> conclusion :
> 
> if none of the solutions kingsley presented [see below] is applied
> a verifier currently MUST reject non-# uris that don't respond with 303 if said verifier wants to be spec-compliant.

Why MUST? That is very strong.

Henry


> 
> wkr j
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Williams" <home_pw@msn.com>
> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:58:25 AM
> Subject: RE: Slash URIs and WebID Experiment
> 
> 
> NOw answer the hard question I asked a long time ago (before folks with actual intelligence analyzed the issue).
> 
> one cannot assume the self-signed or not-signed cert sender does it right - and that is the nature of the project (recall). (If it wasnt Id have had a windows SSL verifier up a long time ago.)
> 
> So, what MUST the verifier do.
> 
> As it stands, some reject, some dont. Henry told: its sort of ok-ish, jsut recognize folks may think you are a document. Having been a queen, I dont mind being anything at this point. If I can be a document and get access, I dont care. Im not here to be anything but a (stupid) user, or hacker, gaming the system.
> 
> Now, there could be a rule that says: Verifiers shall insist http/s URIs have a particular syntax. The webid URI is rejected, if its not.
> 
> FCNS code does not so reject; but others do for this syntactic reason alone, or for reasons derived from it consequences on then resolving the name. For a while, I believed FCNS was the abiter a conformance testing site. But, its not the case, it accepts at least 2 profile/certs that others reject. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:33:32 -0500
>> From: kidehen@openlinksw.com
>> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Slash URIs and WebID Experiment
>> 
>> On 1/10/12 6:27 PM, Jürgen Jakobitsch wrote:
>>> hi kingsley,
>>> 
>>> i'm glad i could help, thanks for making it as clear as it can get.
>>> 
>>> i have updated my profile and i feel much better as "any kind of resource" than as "information resource" :)
>>> 
>>> for people who want to follow your steps below, i did backup my old slash-profile @ http://www.turnguard.com/mylifeasdocument.
>>> 
>>> one note on my old profile and uriburner : you might have an old version cached.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> so your point is simply,
>>> 
>>> if we want webid to stick (hard) to linked data principles, we must have a possibility to put the difference between
>>> name and address into the certificate. why? because linked data principles are not limited to 2-in-1-hash-uris
>>> and a webid like http://www.turnguard.com/mylifeasdocument must be rejected because it can't be both (name and address)
>>> without breaking said principles.
>>> 
>>> right?
>> 
>> Amen!
>> 
>> Kingsley
>>> wkr j
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Kingsley Idehen"<kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>>> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 7:35:53 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Slash URIs and WebID Experiment
>>> 
>>> On 1/10/12 11:58 AM, Jürgen Jakobitsch wrote:
>>>> hi,
>>>> 
>>>> i'm not sure if this webid [1] meets your test criteria. anyway here are the results.
>>>> 
>>>> 1. http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html
>>>> accepted
>>>> 2. https://webid.turnguard.com:8443/WebIDTestServer/
>>>> accepted
>>>> 3. https://resourceme.bergnet.org
>>>> failed
>>>> 3.1. http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/earl/RelyingParty#profileGet => failed
>>>> and consequently all tests southwards failed.
>>>> 4. http://webid.fcns.eu/
>>>> passed (when using https://auth.fcns.eu/auth/index.php?authreqissuer=http://webid.fcns.eu/index.php)
>>>> passed (when using https://foafssl.org/srv/idp?authreqissuer=http://webid.fcns.eu/index.php)
>>>> 5. https://foafssl.org/test/WebId
>>>> passed
>>>> 
>>>> cleared cache, cookies and active logins (in firefox) and retried
>>>> 
>>>> 6. https://resourceme.bergnet.org
>>>> failed
>>>> 6.1. http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/earl/RelyingParty#profileAllKeysWellFormed => failed
>>>> and consequently all tests southwards failed.
>>>> 
>>>> wkr j
>>>> 
>>>> [1] http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>>> Jurgen,
>>> 
>>> For WebID, great i.e., you put it in SAN and it worked.
>>> 
>>> For Linked Data no [1][2]!
>>> 
>>> What you have proven is this: WebID doesn't need the full fidelity of
>>> Linked Data. If it did, then your use of a slash URI that returns a 200
>>> OK means Name/Address ambiguity, a Linked Data no-no. Ultimately, you
>>> end up with problems associated with object equivalence fidelity (be it
>>> by names or values). Using more conventional Linked Data parlance, via 
>>> this URI, you are confusing yourself with a document.
>>> 
>>> Conclusion: your slash URI doesn't exhibit the same Linked Data
>>> characteristics demonstrated by mine [3][4]. That's not a bad thing
>>> since my fundamental point is that:
>>> 
>>> 1. my slash based HTTP URI is generated by my Linked Data platform.
>>> 
>>> 2. use of my platform or others, shouldn't be the base requirement for 
>>> WebID if it seeks full Linked Data fidelity as a mandatory requirement 
>>> for HTTP URIs in a Certs. SAN.
>>> 
>>> You are proving my point !
>>> 
>>> SPARQL Query Proof:
>>> 
>>> ## using old WebID query pattern since your graph is using old WebID
>>> related relations still
>>> 
>>> PREFIX :<http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert#>
>>> PREFIX xsd:<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
>>> SELECT * WHERE {
>>> ?identity cert:identity<http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard> .
>>> ?identity rsa:modulus ?m ;
>>> rsa:public_exponent ?e . }
>>> 
>>> SPARQL Protocol URL Links:
>>> 
>>> 1. http://uriburner.com/c/IBZM4R -- sparql query results
>>> 2. http://uriburner.com/c/IBJUQG -- sparql query editor.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Links:
>>> 
>>> 1. http://uriburner.com/c/IBJUQP -- URI debugger output (note: re.
>>> Linked Data that should be a 200 OK)
>>> 
>>> 2. http://uriburner.com/c/IBJUQS -- note how it shows you only have
>>> descriptor (information) resource address
>>> 
>>> 3. http://uriburner.com/c/IBZM45 -- notice the 303 (how HTTP message
>>> exchange is used to facilitate indirection via redirection)
>>> 
>>> 4. http://uriburner.com/c/IBYXSV -- note how the report concludes that I
>>> have a generic Name distinct from a descriptor (information) resource
>>> address.
>>> 
>>> Thank you once again, for helping me showcase an inevitable problem for
>>> those who want to start their WebID journey in commodity/consumer mode 
>>> leveraging "cut, paste, and place at an address" patterns i.e., the most
>>> common Web technology exploitation pattern.
>>> 
>>> Solutions:
>>> 
>>> 1. Lower Linked Data fidelity requirements in WebID -- it becomes an
>>> option, so 200 OK is fine if the SPARQL ASK still works
>>> 2. Allow multiple HTTP URIs in SAN where functions are clear re. Name
>>> and Address roles
>>> 3. Consider another (optional) location for the descriptor (information)
>>> resource address e.g. sIA.
>>> 
>>> We need at least one of the above to address the problem introduced by 
>>> HTTP URIs. One that many just don't understand until bitten.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Kingsley
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Kingsley Idehen"<kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>>>> To: "WebID XG"<public-xg-webid@w3.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 3:30:32 PM
>>>> Subject: Slash URIs and WebID Experiment
>>>> 
>>>> All,
>>>> 
>>>> The URI:
>>>> http://id.myopenlink.net/about/id/entity/http/twitter.com/kidehen , is
>>>> now fine for testing purposes.
>>>> 
>>>> I've verified successfully using:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. http://id.myopenlink.net/ods/webid_demo.html
>>>> 2. https://webid.turnguard.com:8443/WebIDTestServer/
>>>> 3. https://resourceme.bergnet.org
>>>> 4. http://webid.fcns.eu/
>>>> 5. https://foafssl.org/test/WebId .
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Now, it would be nice to see someone else produce a Cert. with a slash
>>>> based HTTP URI in its SAN that passes through all of the above, or at 
>>>> least a majority of them.
>>>> 
>>>> At this juncture, for experimentation you have the following HTTP URI 
>>>> based Names:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
>>>> 2. http://id.myopenlink.net/about/id/entity/http/twitter.com/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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> | Jürgen Jakobitsch,
> | Software Developer
> | Semantic Web Company GmbH
> | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
> | A - 1070 Wien, Austria
> | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22
> 
> COMPANY INFORMATION
> | http://www.semantic-web.at/
> 
> PERSONAL INFORMATION
> | web   : http://www.turnguard.com
> | foaf  : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
> | skype : jakobitsch-punkt
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2012 14:57:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 11 January 2012 14:57:01 GMT