- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 20:16:54 +1100
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Henry, I�m sure that�s interesting work, but it�s off-topic for this list. Thanks, On 18 Nov 2013, at 8:10 pm, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote: > Hi Tim, hi all. > > Since my days at Sun Microsystems working with Tim Bray I have been developing with > a loose knit distributed community a set of standards based tools that show how one can > answer a lot of the negatives put forward here in order to build a more secure web with > pervasive TLS based encryption. The idea is to use tools and standards that exist off > the shelf. > > The answer is to distribute data to the nodes, so that each person/organisation physically > controlls its own information on its servers. This requires distributed authentication and > distributed access control. It requires ease of use. All of that can in fact be achieved in > my opinion. > > I can explain this here. But most of you will find something annoying about it. > Tim will be skeptical because we use RDF. Others will be skeptical because we > use client side TLS certificiates for identification without using CAs to sign them, > .... I think the pain point makes it worth trying something new. > > you can check the list of specs we use > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/index.html > > But of course that won't help that much. You have to see it in action to see it > working. > > If some of you are in Paris next week we'll be having a Workship at the Mozilla labs > in Paris to show how that works. > https://github.com/stample/wiki/wiki/Weave-the-web-we-want > > if you can't read the doc, then check out the project README to get an idea > of how this works ( with curl: you'll need to imagine it doing the same with JS ) > https://github.com/stample/rww-play > > Henry > > > On 17 Nov 2013, at 02:03, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote: > >> There has been a *whole lot* of traffic on this subject. It�s fascinating that the meeting of minds is so difficult, and any possibility of that happening is made more difficult by the discussion skewing back and forth across the road. >> >> To help sort things out in my own mind, I just went and read the last few hundred messages and attempted to curate the pervasive/mandatory encryption arguments, pro and contra. It�s in a Google doc that�s open to comment by anyone: http://goo.gl/6yhpC1 Hm, is there a handy wiki platform somewhere that can stand up to the pressure? >> >> I don�t know if trying to organize the talking points is generally useful, but I sure found it personally useful; maybe others will too. >> >> Disclosure: I remain pretty strongly in favor of as much mandatory encryption as we can get, so that may have filtered my expression of the issues. I've version-stamped this: 2013/11/16, and promise not to change it in case people comment on it. > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 09:17:27 UTC