W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-wg@w3.org > May 2018

[wot-security] minutes - 14 May 2018

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:15:34 +0900
Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9Wr9twyNyvkdD6YsMsBEz92pzCwOrYLiaZGvHEi-2_U-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Michael Koster!




      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                              WoT Security

14 May 2018


      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_Security_WebConf#May_14.2C_2018


          Elena_Reshetova, Michael_Koster, Zoltan_Kis,
          Kazuaki_Nimura, Tomoaki_Mizushima





     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]TD security vocabulary from scripting API review
         2. [5]PR review
         3. [6]tunnel configuration, on line test system
     * [7]Summary of Action Items
     * [8]Summary of Resolutions


      [9] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/Teleconference_cheat_sheet

   <McCool> scribenick: mjkoster

TD security vocabulary from scripting API review


     [10] https://rawgit.com/zolkis/wot-scripting-api/master/index.html

   McCool: where is the URL?
   ... for the topic?


     [11] https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/#security

   Zoltan: what is the property"n"?

   McCool: these belong inside the "scheme" element
   ... do you have the latest version?
   ... the vocabulary is in the security metadata section
   ... each scheme has a set of properties for that scheme

   Zoltan: this document is enough information to proceed, thanks

   McCool: checking the document again, pointing out some examples
   ... terminology comes from openAPI to be consistent with known

   <McCool> mccool: please look at the end of

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/blob/working/wot-security-metadata.md

   <McCool> ... there are a lot more terms than just scheme and in

PR review

   Elena: privacy section
   ... section 7
   ... privacy considerations
   ... who is the subject, whose privacy is being protected
   ... who are the privacy stakeholders?
   ... review of the roles involved, manufacturer, installer, etc

   McCool: the primary subject is the end user

   Elena: agree, are there any other considerations we need to

   McCool: privacy is a personal consideration, for corporations
   it is confidentiality

   Elena: review the table of threat categories

   McCool: fingerprinting threat is about assembling all of the
   information to create a unique ID
   ... could elaborate in the last row of the table
   ... also add a tracking risk category
   ... behavior observation

   Elena: any other threats or risks that are not covered here?

   McCool: disclosure of sensitive data, leaking
   ... Thing Directory could disclose a personal inventory, things
   ... payload data
   ... unique IDs on things that can be used for tracking

   Elena: please think about more cases and email or discuss

tunnel configuration, on line test system

   McCool: issues with converting graphics and fonts, etc.
   ... added text discussing a tunnel proxy approach in addition
   to local+remote proxies
   ... could be an IP tunnel or SSH tunnel that maps ports
   ... the thing is responsible for its own security
   ... which is somewhat hard
   ... another version is the proxy
   ... using http instead of https
   ... the security is added at the tunnel
   ... network endpoints are exposed locally
   ... but can be hidden behind other security and gateways
   ... have implemented this in an online test system
   ... has examples with different security schemes
   ... gives demonstration of the online systems including raw OCF
   and generated TDs
   ... more secure system would only expose thing directory and
   the interactions themselves
   ... camera example
   ... currently has basic and digest running, adding tokens next
   ... please review and provide feedback, will merge next week
   ... a section on the caching proxy
   ... also could use metadata of TD to pre-observe properties and
   perform other optimization
   ... security implication of the proxy having access to the
   payload, maybe OSCORE could be part of a solution
   ... 9 minutes left, could review some issues

   Elena: what about the life cycle/provisioning issue?
   ... #15
   ... is provisioning in scope?

   McCool: thought it was out of scope

   Elena: sharing the document
   ... haven't updated it
   ... last statement is about the scope

   McCool: should be able to close the issue as out of scope
   ... any objections?
   ... no objections, will close
   ... issue 93, end of life of TD

   zoltan: going with observable TD

   McCool: need to review the security implications of this
   ... let's leave it open and return to it
   ... AOB?
   ... online system is in my apartment but go ahead and use it
   ... adjourn

Summary of Action Items

   [ONGOING] ACTION: elena to work on issue 68 (Thing Provider
   Data Specification) and issue 69 (Passive Observers Risk)
   [ONGOING] ACTION: elena/koster to work on terminology
   [ONGOING] ACTION: mccool to work on issue 70 (Require Not
   Exposing Immutable Hardware Identifiers?)
   [ONGOING] ACTION: mccool to talk with security guys about
   testing/validation timeline
   [ONGOING] ACTION: mccool to work on tunneling/shadow for the
   security metadata proposal
   [ONGOING] ACTION: mccool to work on PR 90
   [ONGOING] ACTION: zkis to create scripting issue for TD life
   cycle in scripting api
   [ONGOING] ACTION: mjkoster/elena to review examples in the
   security spec

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version
    1.152 ([14]CVS log)
    $Date: 2018/05/21 23:03:21 $

     [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [14] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Monday, 21 May 2018 23:16:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:49 UTC