I had a similar though.  I was wondering if the definitions provided would
support a BlockChain like approach which does not have a centralized
"authority".

 

Gary

 

From: Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org <Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org> On Behalf Of
William Bartholomew (CELA) via lists.spdx.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 4:14 PM
To: SPDX-list <Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org>; dk1...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [spdx-tech] Identities

 

These all seem reasonable to me. My only comment is that there may not be a
"formal" authority. For example, an identification scheme could use an
algorithm to derive a globally unique identifier or use a convention to
guarantee sufficient uniqueness. An authority may or may not associate an
identifier with an identity.

 

Regards,

 

William Bartholomew (he/him) -  <https://aka.ms/book-willbar> Let's chat

Principal Security Strategist

Global Cybersecurity Policy - Microsoft

 

My working day may not be your working day. Please don't feel obliged to
reply to this e-mail outside of your normal working hours.

  _____  

From: Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org <mailto:Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org>
<Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org <mailto:Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org> > on behalf of
David Kemp via lists.spdx.org <dk190a=gmail....@lists.spdx.org
<mailto:dk190a=gmail....@lists.spdx.org> >
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 2:59 PM
To: SPDX-list <Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org <mailto:Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org> >
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [spdx-tech] Identities 

 

At the tech meeting we decided to accept the current identity model and move
forward without blocking the 3.0 release.  The discussion covered many ideas
on which no decisions were documented, and I wonder if we can reach
agreement on these points while the discussion is still fresh, without
allowing any No Decisions to become blockers.

1) An Identifier is different from an Identity.

Discussion: Identifiers have the property of being associated with zero,
one, or multiple identities over time.  Note: at any specific time an
identifier should be associated with at most one identity.

2) Every Identity MUST have an authority. 

 

Discussion: The authority associates identifiers with identities. If there
is no authority, there can be no identity to which an identifier refers.
* The Social Security Administration is the authority that maintains records
of peoples' identities. Every 9 digit number is an identifier, but only some
of those identifiers are associated with an identity: 000-00-0000 and
123-45-6789 are "SSN identifiers" but they (probably) have never been
assigned to an identity by the authority.

* "hotmail.com
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhotmail.co
m%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cwillbar%40microsoft.com%7Ccb99e45f23e84d1dc13008daf4278a
e5%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638090747920318654%7CUnknown
%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6M
n0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tqTKUfKN0kHX4nQ6ieRZH8xQUqWgqpWo3b%2FvH2jVSbc%3D
&reserved=0> " is the authority that maintains hotmail identities.  The
identifier "a...@hotmail.com <mailto:a...@hotmail.com> " is (probably) not an
identity because of minimum length restrictions on the local portion.  The
authority assigns identifiers to identities, ensuring uniqueness.  The
identifier  "john.sm...@hotmail.com <mailto:john.sm...@hotmail.com> " has
probably been assigned to several identities over time. The authority
determines if it is currently assigned to any identity.

* Without assistance from the authority it is impossible for SPDX to
distinguish the identities to which an identifier is assigned.  If
"john_sm...@hotmail.com <mailto:john_sm...@hotmail.com> " is an active
identity in 2021 and 2022, it is impossible to know if they are the same
identity or two different identities unless some other information (such as
SSN or a hypothetical hotmail UID) is included in those identities. SpdxId
is not part of the identity - many Identity Elements can be created for the
same identity.

 

3) Authorities determine what subject types they support

 

Discussion: SSA will not assign identities to anyone other than natural
people - it is fraud to attempt to create fake accounts.  Hotmail doesn't do
any identity proofing - anyone or anything can get a hotmail account on
request, so the distinction between person and organization doesn't exist
for that authority. Squatters have claimed many obvious hotmail organization
identifiers, but at the moment "hondavehicl...@hotmail.com
<mailto:hondavehicl...@hotmail.com> " is available.

 

4) Some authorities create identities and assign identifiers to processes

 

Discussion: A process identity type is not a PID running on an operating
system, it is a subject type accepted by an identity management authority.
Hotmail has already created "dependa...@hotmail.com
<mailto:dependa...@hotmail.com> " and "veri...@hotmail.com
<mailto:veri...@hotmail.com> " identities, and "sboma...@hotmail.com
<mailto:sboma...@hotmail.com> " is currently available to be claimed.  As
above, hotmail does not do any identity proofing or declaration of identity
types.  But the U.S. Government does explicitly manage non-person entity
identities for corporations, devices and processes in addition to person
identities.

It is neither esoteric nor difficult to accommodate process identities in
the logical model; the same standard of acceptance should apply to
Principals/Actors/Agents that are processes as to those that are persons or
organizations.

Dave





-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#4916): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4916
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/96211555/21656
Group Owner: spdx-tech+ow...@lists.spdx.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to