[Freedombox-discuss] FOAF developers taking FreedomBox into their equation
On 10 March 2011 00:02, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 10:29:06PM +0000, Clint Adams wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 09:09:25PM +0100, Henry Story wrote:
>>> ?I am also currently chairing the WebID incubator group at the W3C, ? so
>>> if you have WebID questions don't hesitate to ping me, or join ? the W3C
>>> mailing list and ping there.
>> I hope that in the long run we are going to want to rid ourselves of
>> any dependence on centralized DNS and SSL certificate authorities.
>> Is WebID going to have any features to facilitate this or are we going
>> to need to have a separate CA certificate for each client or server
>> certificate, and a bunch of out-of-band validation hacks to ensure
>> that these SSL certificates and FOAF profiles are actually owned
>> and controlled by the people we expect them to be?
> WebID rely on DNS, but do not require _centralized_ DNS.
> WebID use SSL certificates, but do not require _centralized_ certificate
> authorities, Actually, due to requiring an unusual additional hint, some
> centralized CA autorities including CAcert.org cannot currently provide
> WebID compatible certificates.
Traditionally we've always 'self signed' our WebID certificates. So
there's no CA that needs to be in the loop. In fact, I dont know of
any instance WebID has *ever* been used with a CA, but I suppose it is
possible too. :)
> ?- Jonas
> ?* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
> ?* Tlf.: +45 40843136 ?Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
> ?[x] quote me freely ?[ ] ask before reusing ?[ ] keep private
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org