Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[EDDSA] Highlight security/privacy trade-offs between RDF-CANON and JCS #195

Closed
msporny opened this issue Aug 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed
Labels
before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. pending close (7 days) This issue will be closed after 7 days. pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue. privacy-needs-resolution Issue the Privacy Group has raised and looks for a response on. security-needs-resolution Issue the security Group has raised and looks for a response on.

Comments

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Aug 18, 2023

From the PING's review (w3cping/privacy-request#120):

The spec should highlight the security tradeoffs that occur between section 3.1 and section 3.2 or select one to avoid encountering issue 1 highlighted in the w3cping/privacy-request#121 (comment) . The security of section 3.1 relies upon https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-canon/ which is light on the security and privacy sections as well. It appears it's undergoing a review at the moment as well with w3cping/privacy-request#118

/cc @kdenhartog

@msporny msporny added the CR1 This item was processed during the first Candidate Recommendation phase. label Aug 18, 2023
@msporny msporny added privacy-needs-resolution Issue the Privacy Group has raised and looks for a response on. security-needs-resolution Issue the security Group has raised and looks for a response on. labels Aug 26, 2023
@msporny msporny changed the title Highlight security/privacy trade-offs between RDF-CANON and JCS [EDDSA] Highlight security/privacy trade-offs between RDF-CANON and JCS Sep 15, 2023
@msporny msporny transferred this issue from w3c/vc-di-eddsa Sep 15, 2023
@msporny msporny added before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. and removed CR1 This item was processed during the first Candidate Recommendation phase. labels Sep 15, 2023
@msporny
Copy link
Member Author

msporny commented Sep 15, 2023

This is a duplicate of #194. Marking pending close (as we'll address this in #194). If PR #199 is merged before then, this issue will be closed once that PR is merged.

@msporny msporny added the pending close (7 days) This issue will be closed after 7 days. label Sep 15, 2023
@msporny msporny added the pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue. label Sep 15, 2023
@msporny
Copy link
Member Author

msporny commented Sep 28, 2023

PR #199 has been merged, closing.

@msporny msporny closed this as completed Sep 28, 2023
@plehegar plehegar added privacy-tracker Group bringing to attention of Privacy, or tracked by the Privacy Group but not needing response. security-tracker Group bringing to attention of security, or tracked by the security Group but not needing response. and removed security-needs-resolution Issue the security Group has raised and looks for a response on. labels Nov 16, 2023
@w3cbot w3cbot added security-needs-resolution Issue the security Group has raised and looks for a response on. and removed privacy-tracker Group bringing to attention of Privacy, or tracked by the Privacy Group but not needing response. security-tracker Group bringing to attention of security, or tracked by the security Group but not needing response. labels Jan 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
before CR This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase. pending close (7 days) This issue will be closed after 7 days. pr exists A pull request exists to address this issue. privacy-needs-resolution Issue the Privacy Group has raised and looks for a response on. security-needs-resolution Issue the security Group has raised and looks for a response on.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants