Re: W3C position on URIs http:// vs. https://

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 7:08 PM Jürgen Jakobitsch
<juergen.jakobitsch@semantic-web.com> wrote:
>
> :-)
>
> there is no such thing as "using a http URI for downloading" in the semantic web .
>
> what you can download is a document from a specific URL (mind the L) which contains well specified serializations of RDF triples the subject of which
> will be a URI.
>
> it's a matter of linked data deployment:
>
> curl -L -H "accept:text/turtle" http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>
> can respond with HTTP 303, Location: https://www.turnguard.com/turnguard.ttl (containing triples with http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard as the subject)
>
> in short a URI is not a URL ;-)

Try loading that http:// URL from a secure web page in a web browser
and you will get an error re. "unsecure content".
Related issue: https://github.com/dbpedia/extraction-framework/issues/718

The reality is that the browser implementations are de facto standards.

A practical solution is to use a proxy server and pass the namespace
URIs indirectly.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jürgen Jakobitsch
> Director of Infrastructure & Information Security
> Semantic Web Company GmbH
> EU: +43-14021235
> US: (415) 800-3776
> Mobile: +43-676-6212710
> https://www.poolparty.biz
> https://www.semantic-web.com
>
> Download E-Book: Introducing Semantic AI
>
>
> Am Di., 13. Juni 2023 um 17:49 Uhr schrieb Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>>
>> út 13. 6. 2023 v 17:37 odesílatel Hubauer, Thomas <thomas.hubauer@siemens.com> napsal:
>>>
>>> Hi SemWeb community,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One of my projects is considering making some of our ontologies accessible to customers. As part of these considerations, we have been discussing resolving ontology references (e.g. for imports) which lead us to some lengthy arguments about http:// vs. https:// as protocol part in our URIs (primarily ontology URIs, potentially element URIs as well).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am aware of a 2016 post (https://www.w3.org/blog/2016/05/https-and-the-semantic-weblinked-data/) stating that W3C currently considers http and https to be “equivalent” for w3c.org. However, the security guys I am working with are not too happy with this as using a http URI for downloading imported ontologies is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was unable to find any more recent statement by the W3C on the use of http vs. https. Specifically, I’d be interested to understand if this community (and the W3C) intend to stick with http for the foreseeable future, of if there’s any plans to migrate some/all URIs (e.g. ontology URIs but not element URIs) to https ? Would be nice for us to understand what “the outer world” plans so we can maybe take this as a blueprint for our own guidance on URIs.
>>
>>
>> I'm with TimBL on this:
>>
>> "HTTPS Everywhere" considered harmful
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Security-NotTheS.html
>>
>> The Semantic Web has been around for a couple of decades.  Is there any documented instance of an MITM attack on an ontology ever causing an issue?
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

Received on Tuesday, 13 June 2023 17:41:09 UTC