Dear Lazyweb: Certificates in RDF?
Dear Lazyweb,
The project I’m working on will be using cryptographic certificates in a distributed web-of-trust model a little like that of PGP. It will also use certs as more than just proofs of identity. Given that I’ll be writing a lot of code using certs, I want to avoid the nastiness of X.509 whenever possible.
After thinking about this a while, it seems to me that RDF ought to be a good way to represent certs, since it describes arbitrary types of relationships between entities (e.g. FOAF), and allows them to be composed in complex ways. And there are a lot of tools available for parsing/storing/querying RDF.
Unfortunately, I know very little about RDF so far, or about the uses to which it’s being put. I’ve been looking, but I haven’t found any existing schema yet for using RDF for cryptographic certificates. Does anyone know of such a thing, or something related?
(The closest thing I know of is SDSI, a Simple Distributed Security Architecture, which was inspirational to me in showing how one can use general-purpose data structures like S-expressions to describe certs and form a web of trust. But SDSI and its successor SPKI seem to be dead, sadly, and nothing comparable has replaced them.)
Thanks,
—Jens
Update, 30 January:
No answer being forthcoming, and given the learning curve of RDF, I’m now pursuing the approach of representing certs in YAML. I also considered JSON, but YAML is essentially a superset of JSON that has some very useful features like tagging and aliasing.
January 27th, 2008 at 11:30 AM
[…] http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2008/01/dear-lazyweb-certificates-in-rdf/ asks Hoosgot, […]
January 27th, 2008 at 12:32 PM
1. Create your own microformat
2. See it get adopted
3. See other people want to extend it
4. Watch it get forked and become a ginormous political battleground
5. End up with 20 incompatible billion variants of the same microformat ANYWAY
January 27th, 2008 at 1:10 PM
@fluffy — But your step 1 already conflicts with my stated goal of laziness.
(I might do it anyway, but I’m looking around first.)
January 27th, 2008 at 2:18 PM
When I saw the title, I thought it had to do with Reality Distortion Fields. :)