- From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:13:38 -0400
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: peter williams <home_pw@msn.com>, public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <BANLkTinNwqwS-J4oa+pykmC2daq3WcFY6g@mail.gmail.com>
I find it strange that on a paper on WebID, most contributors do not have their WebID URI in the RDFa. We've got Henry's and mine in, please send me your WebID so I can add them in and avoid creating blank nodes ;) (private email is fine to avoid noise on the mailing list). Steph. On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>wrote: > > On 27 Apr 2011, at 17:21, peter williams wrote: > > > You might want to browse it - being all about the technology topics you > > often struggle with. ON the other hand, when looking at life anew, > sometimes > > ignorance helps - so you is not drawn into the older mental models. > > > > Anyways, there are three terms of art: > > > > Identity verification > > User authentication > > Information assurance > > Ok, so when you go to a university, the Uni educates you, then tests you, > then gives you a degree. That is information assurance! What is the > information? > > Uni assures { X has Degree; > field :medicine > course </2011/Med/Liver> .. } > > Presumably that means that he knows a certain amount about the subject. But > nothing > is absolutely final of course as you point out. His thesis may have been > plagiarised, > as recently happened in Germany when the Minister of Defence was found to > have employed > someone else to write his thesis. > > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704506004576173970765020528.html > > If the university had given Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg a WebID, they would > not remove > their claim from his doctoral certificate page. > > So it is easy to do assurance using WebID, and to remove assurance too. > > Henry > > > > > A term of art is rarely discussed in Wikipedia or a common dictionary. > > > > Identity verification is that act which a notary performs when he/she > > authenticated an individual through personal knowledge or, more likely, > > checking your passport or drivers license as evidence of id. The notary > > attests to having done that act, while then making a statement. Early in > > certs, for use by early Apple Mac users, one got a X.509 cert by first > going > > to a notary, obtaining the affidavit mentioned, and then sending that as > > evidence of (notary-based) id verification to the CA . > > > > User authenication is the presentation of the cert to a relying party, > along > > with a signature showing control over the private key. > > > > Information assurance has nothing to do with any of the above, except > when > > computers are used in the processes above. If you want a birth cert from > the > > state of Hawaii, there is information assurance practices - that support > the > > status of a bit of paper as a "record". Long form records may be valid > > legally, for the purposes of id verification; or may not. Because > assurance > > rules change, only shoft form record may not be valid, legally. Assurance > > rules may require "originals", and not copies, and may distintuish > certified > > copies (from copies, and from originals). A certified copy may have to be > > emboseed, by a particular seal (acting as a unique signing device.) > > > > In the computer world, IA often comes down to the security audit, for the > > data center. If you are Comodo selling cert, and your resellers apply > > computers to access the minting services, and that channel is protected > > poorly, one can have the ridiculous situation in which the auditor > performed > > investigations and tests that qualified the information assurance legvel > as > > "sufficient", but non the less the channel is insecure. That's because, > IA > > is about rules, not security. Its similar to an accounting audit that > says > > the firm is not crooked, but it goes bust anyways. What matters is that > the > > tests shew it was not crooked, to "assure" the public, using the services > of > > public certified accountants. > > > > Yes apple assure the public their phone is safe. Doesn't mean the fine > print > > of the contract is not set to allow them and their friends to spy on you, > in > > a manner you find offense - since you didn't KNOW you agreed to it!? Its > > deceptive, despite the assurance. The US government assures the public > that > > new citizens are suitable citizens. Doesn't mean they are not ex-SS > > officers, having spent years designed terror weapons, having run factorys > > making them and having actually killed 20k civilians...(in London) in > > attempt to terrorise an entire population. Assurance means they now fit > > American rules, which change with the times. > > > > In the CA world, the government generally seeks assurance that the firms > > will "do the right thing" - when asked. (This means spy, when served a > > covert order.) Its an important assurance, that the firm has CEO and > staff > > that are "oriented" - and trustworthy, and can be trusted (to maintain > the > > secrecy of the covert surveillance order, and scope the interception to > the > > named individual, not the operators ex-spouse...). > > > > Put a key in the RDFa of the document. See what happens... its not > logical, > > but then neither is a non-deterministic search that guesses. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-xg-webid-request@w3.org [mailto: > public-xg-webid-request@w3.org] > > On Behalf Of Henry Story > > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 11:44 AM > > To: peter williams > > Cc: 'Dominik Tomaszuk'; public-xg-webid@w3.org > > Subject: Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity > > > > > > On 26 Apr 2011, at 20:34, peter williams wrote: > > > >> Please remove the link to > >> http://agendabuilder.gartner.com/IAM4/WebPages/SessionList.aspx?Speake > >> r=7019 > >> 95 for my name. Or just remove my name all together (whichever is > > easiest). > >> I do not want an association with Rapattoni to be inferred by readers. > >> > >> Im mostly making a point, tuned to webid, that individuals are in > >> charge - and do NOT need an organizational affiliation. They also do > >> NOT need evidence of standing (such as garner though me worth inviting > >> to talk about the needs of realty, to others deploying websso). > >> > >> I know, it's a hard habit to break, since individuals have no standing > >> in academia; only having any authority when introduced as "faculty" > >> (which then governs one's credentials and one's reputations). > > > > But I thought many of your points on this list was on the importance of > > Information Assurance. > > Are universities, companies posting profiles about people not well > establish > > ways of doing information assurance? > > > > Henry > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: public-xg-webid-request@w3.org > >> [mailto:public-xg-webid-request@w3.org] > >> On Behalf Of Dominik Tomaszuk > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 7:43 AM > >> To: public-xg-webid@w3.org; Henry Story > >> Subject: Re: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on Identity > >> > >> On 26.04.2011 12:09, Dominik Tomaszuk wrote: > >>> On 26.04.2011 10:36, Henry Story wrote: > >>>> Ok, the paper is ready for xhtml export. Any further changes can > >>>> then be edited in the xhtml. > >>> OK. In a few hours XHTML+RDFa version will be ready. > >> Alpha version without CSS, valid XHTML+RDFa: > >> > >> http://ii.uwb.edu.pl/~dtomaszuk/webid.html > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Dominik Tomaszuk > >> > > > > Social Web Architect > > http://bblfish.net/ > > > > > > > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:14:07 UTC