- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:06:16 -0600
- To: "Smith, Ned" <ned.smith@intel.com>
- CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
"Smith, Ned" wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > In a semantic web paper by James Hendler, a layer cake of > technologies is presented with Unicode/URI at the bottom followed by > XML, RDF, Ontology vocabulary, logic, proof and finally trust. The > intermediate layers (RDF, ontology, logic and proof) are protected > ala digital signature (I presume W3C DSIG). > > I'd like to undersand the proof and trust layers, namely what is > being prooved and what is being trusted? Coincidently, I was just updating a description of our work on that, and I discovered a new paper: A Proof-Carrying Authorization System. Lujo Bauer, Michael A. Schneider, and Edward W. Felten. Technical report CS-TR-638-01, Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, April 2001. http://ncstrl.cs.princeton.edu/expand.php?id=TR-638-01 linked from SIP: Proof-Carrying Authorization http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/projects/pca/ linked from The Semantic Web as a language of logic http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Logic#PCA linked from Access Control Rules, Logic, and Proof in Semantic Web Activity: Advanced Development http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/#access While I was at it, I discovered a really nice diagram/slide by Marja: SW Principles 3: Web of Trust http://www.w3.org/Talks/2001/1102-semweb-fin/slide14-0.html > The use of digital signature suggests that key management is some how > involved. Can anyone clarify? Is there the expectation that a PKI > will be used (for example)? The proofs pretty much subsume credentials and traditional PKI stuff. > Regarding proofs. One possible dimension to proof is the idea that > one party must prove possession of a secret (a basic element of > authentication). Is this an aspect of the proof layer? Sort of. > What other > dimensions are implied by the proof layer? > > Trust has been used in a variety of ways. In DOD Orange Book systems > it describes the Trusted Computing Base which does not rely on > external checking mechanisms for its assurances. In financial systems > trust is better understood as risk management and can include > indemnity protection - not relying exclusively on techniques for risk > mitigation. The semantic web seems to apply the "web of trust" > abstraction which could imply a system of distributed cross-checked > nodes. I presume these nodes contain a TCB of sorts. Can anyone > elaborate on the intended architecture for web of trust or the Trust > layer? The trusted computing base is expected to be: a proof checker, which includes the ability to verify digital signatures, plus a knowledge base of policies. see also Necula's proof-carrying code stuff: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~necula/pcc.html -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2001 18:07:55 UTC