[Hardware-based Secure Services CG] Report

Dear all,

In the tele-conference yesterday I suggested that it might be clearer if the current draft report https://rawgit.com/w3c/websec/gh-pages/hbss.html were in fact two separate deliverables:
* A high-level overview of the purpose and activities of the CG, stating the problems the CG is addressing and exploring the two use cases we are considering
* A technical document containing descriptions, IDL and implementation details for the APIs for secure transactions and for secure credential storage.

At the moment, with the two mixed together in one document, I think it is not clear who the intended audience is. At this point we wish to improve the chances that the CG is re-chartered as a WG; this can be done by highlighting the problems the group is trying to solve and showing that there is a gap not currently being addressed by any other standards-track group. This should be backed up by technical descriptions of the APIs for the selected use cases, but given that we are not yet chartered as a standards-track working group, I don't think that the API should dominate the use cases in the same report. 

It's just a suggestion, and one that the half-dozen participants in the tele-conference could not agree to by themselves, so I'm asking the question of the rest of the group, whether you would prefer to see the report restructured in this way.


Mark Orzechowski

This information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Infomation Act 2000 and may be subject to exemption under other UK information legislation. Refer disclosure requests by email to cesgfoia@cesg.gsi.gov.uk

Communications with CESG may be monitored and/or recorded for system efficiency and other lawful purposes. Any views or opinions expressed in this email do not necessarily reflect CESG policy. This email, and any attachments, is intended for the attention of the addressee(s) only. Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the originator of the email.


Received on Wednesday, 13 July 2016 15:19:22 UTC