- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 09:24:03 -0400
- To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com,public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On August 7, 2014 9:07:15 AM EDT, Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote: >Kingsley: >It's an optional feature. You don't have to implement it. The point is it's an anti-pattern. Until someone comes up with a compelling use case, sub-LDPR access control shouldn't even be an option. - Sandro >All the best, Ashok > >On 8/7/2014 6:48 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> On 8/6/14 9:34 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: >>> Some quad stores provide access to individual triples. >> >> Yes, Virtuoso does that. >> >>> I know that Oracle allows that and our product folks would like to >>> provide access control at the triple level. >> >> Virtuoso supports ACLs scoped to named graph IRIs. For all the >reasons already outlined in prior posts from Sandro, Henry, and I. >> >>> Thus, I am reluctant to remove this requirement. >> >> Sorry, but the requirement reflects misunderstanding of the role of >named graphs in relation to triples. >> >> Look at it this way, from an RDBMS that supports RDF perspective: >> >> 1. A named graph denotes an internal document identifier -- remember, >a Table is a document in an RDBMS (because a database != rdbms system; >they are distinct things) >> >> 2. You protect documents not specific sentences and paragraphs in >documents -- redaction isn't the same thing as ACLs, in the case of >ACLs you are (like in the real world) controlling access to documents >in a folder, cabinet, cube, building etc.. all of which relate directly >to the subject at hand here. >> >> >> Even if you tried to implement triple scoped ACLs, it would die of >inflexibility and horrific performance. Scalability is not even a >discussion. >> >> Here's an example of a Named Graph ACL template, represented in >Turtle Notation: >> >> ## Protected (Private) Resource Authorization denoted by the IRI ><{ACL-IRI}> ; >> ## created by the Identity Principal denoted by the IRI ><{Rule-Creator-WEBID}> ; >> ## granting Read/Write privileges to the Named Graph denoted by the >IRI <{Target-Named-GRAPH-IRI}> ; >> ## to identity principals denoted by the following IRIs list ><{GROUP-or-AGENT-IRI-1}>, <{GROUP-or-AGENT-IRI-N}>, >> >> PREFIX oplacl: <http://www.openlinksw.com/ontology/acl#> >> PREFIX acl: <http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl#> >> PREFIX foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> >> >> <{ACL-IRI}> >> a acl:Authorization ; >> rdfs:label "ACL based Data Access Policy Example" ; >> rdfs:comment """An ACL based Data Access Policy used to control >access to a specific named graph, >> denoted by a named graph IRI that functions >as the object of an ac:accessTo relation. >> This particular policy grants Read and Write >privileges to >> Identity Principals denoted by the list of >URIs functioning as the object of the acl:agent relation. """ ; >> foaf:maker <{Rule-Creator-WEBID}> ; >> oplacl:hasAccessMode oplacl:Read, oplacl:Write ; >> acl:accessTo <{Target-Named-GRAPH-IRI}> ; >> acl:agent <{GROUP-or-AGENT-IRI-1}>, <{GROUP-or-AGENT-IRI-N}> ; >> oplacl:hasScope oplacl:PrivateGraphs ; >> oplacl:hasRealm oplacl:DefaultRealm . >> >> >> >> Kingsley >>> All the best, Ashok >>> >>> On 8/6/2014 2:11 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>>> On August 5, 2014 5:52:45 AM EDT, Kingsley Idehen ><kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: >>>>> On 8/5/14 10:02 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote: >>>>>> On 4 Aug 2014, at 23:32, Ashok >Malhotra<ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Henry: >>>>>>>> We decided to remove access control for attributes (parts of >>>>> triples) >>>>>>>> We did not discuss removing access control for triples. >>>>>>>> We can discuss this if you wish. >>>>>> I don't see how you can do access control on parts of triples at >all. >>>>>> >>>>>> The argument as I understand it is that one can only give access >or >>>>> not >>>>>> at the HTTP layer to a resource. What state of the resource you >show >>>>>> is another topic: call it filtering. That could be an orthogonal >>>>> spec. >>>>>> It is best to keep things simple and distinct to arrive at a >>>>> consensus. >>>>>> Henry >>>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2014 13:24:12 UTC