[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture

• To: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Subject: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 20:42:42 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <3DA22643.1020905@p...>

> Many people feel otherwise. They feel that the centralization degrades
> security because it erects a single point to attack and introduces a
> third-party into transactions that would otherwise only involve two.

If A and B have already got a trust path, then sure it's only two.  If
not, then someone has to act as the TTP (trusted third party) that
vouchsafe's A's identity to B and vice-versa.  Fewer trust anchors is a
priori easier to manage than more trust anchors.

Zooko's quote was interesting, but I wasn't commenting on
> I guess it depends on what you mean by "trust". And that in turn depends
> on the problem domain.

As always.  Security is a risk management issue.
	/r$

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• Next by Date: RE: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• Previous by thread: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• Next by thread: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread