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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Change on what exactly must be secured in a presentation #1515

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Change on what exactly must be secured in a presentation #1515

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1c0b78e
Change on what must be secured in a presentation
iherman Jul 1, 2024
501eb24
Update index.html
iherman Jul 2, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4266,9 +4266,9 @@ <h3>Securing Mechanism Specifications</h3>
[=default graph=].
Copy link
Contributor

@dlongley dlongley Jul 1, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can't make a suggestion here, but I believe this should not be a statement about a "property" but about a securing mechanism, and it should be simplified to "The securing mechanism MUST secure all graphs in a [=verifiable credential=] not referred to by the property itself."

Similarly, the above "The property MUST define" seems more like it should say "The securing mechanism MUST define". This list should perhaps be about the requirements for the property and the new securing mechanism.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder whether —

Securing mechanism specifications that create new types of [=embedded proofs=] 
MUST specify a [=property=] for securing

— should become the following (which implies further changes to the bullet list, and possibly more) —

Securing mechanism specifications that create new types of [=embedded proofs=]
MUST specify an object for securing both [=verifiable credentials=] and
[=verifiable presentations=].

— (should object be [=object=]?) with appropriate bullet adjustments, such as —

The object MUST provide values for all [=properties] used by the [=proof graph=].

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I not against making this change, but that is more complex change than what this PR proposes to do. I would prefer to finalize this PR first and, if needed, do that in a separate PR.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

B.t.w., @TallTed, the (RDF) "object" term is not used in the core VCDM terminology, only "value".

</li>
<li>
In a [=verifiable presentation=], the property MUST secure the
[=default graph=] of the [=presentation=] as well as every [=proof graph=]
related to each [=verifiable credential=] in the [=presentation=].
In a [=verifiable presentation=], the property MUST secure all
graphs in the [=presentation=] not referred to by the property itself,
including each [=verifiable credential=] and any of its related [=proof graphs=].
</li>
<li>
The `proof` property as defined in [[VC-DATA-INTEGRITY]] MAY be used by the
Expand Down