- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:08:34 -0500
- To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EF220A2.60406@openlinksw.com>
On 12/21/11 12:55 PM, Mo McRoberts wrote: > On 21 Dec 2011, at 17:47, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > >> I used to think so until Henry expressed questionable suggestions about URI handling that breaks the abstraction re. WebID verifiers. > I’m think it was actually Peter initially, but I could be wrong; Henry just revisited the issue, and took a safe (from a security perspective, if broken from a web arch angle) default position. > > I’m not sure why that prompted this whole thread. Just saying “redirection (and indirection!) are a fundamental part of web architecture, we just need to settle on how they’re handled from a security perspective” would’ve been a perfectly decent answer to Henry’s question… > > M. > Here is how I would frame a security problem (something I've done in the past). An owl:sameAs relation exists in a graph somewhere along the de-reference trails. A verifier follows the link and finds match. Or said verifier applies inference and makes a union and then gets a match. In either case, one deftly placed relation have tipped the apple cart. Solution: implementers of WebID verifiers have to factor in crawl depths and relation semantics. Suggestion could go as far as seeking signed claims for specific relations. BTW -- this doesn't have to be part of the WebID spec, it's just a note for engineers. The ultimate challenge for WebID is this, you are going to have variation re. product quality. That's fine, a spec can't control actual engineering, it can only provide the specs for the act of engineering. The Internet was broken security wise before the WWW came along. WebID has a great shot of fixing this problem, but it really has to understand and honor the age-old practice known as separation of powers. The WebID spec shouldn't be about encouraging implementations that are fundamentally technology Camels -- the usual product of attempting innovation by committee. A spec must sit distinct from implementation engineering. -- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 18:09:07 UTC