[Ssc-dev] Authentication, Authorization and Architecture

barbra blmack at gmail.com
Wed Mar 6 22:23:58 EST 2013 

sure.

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Lee Azzarello <lee at rockingtiger.com> wrote:

> 15 or 14?
> On Mar 6, 2013 10:00 PM, "barbra" <blmack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i can do 16:00 gmt.
>>
>> -barbra
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Lee Azzarello <lee at rockingtiger.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I think sooner.  Considering its 10 pm est and timezones, how is 16:00
>>> gmt?
>>>
>>> Lee
>>> On Mar 6, 2013 9:46 PM, "Harlo Holmes" <harlo.holmes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> let's do another call tomorrow to go over these things. any time good
>>>> for you all?
>>>> On Mar 6, 2013 9:42 PM, "barbra" <blmack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> hi
>>>>>
>>>>> some of what lee is proposing has come out of a discussion about how
>>>>> we can have a secure API and more complex authorizations. The API-focus is
>>>>> coming out of a few different needs:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. IBA wants to seperate the file storage system from the
>>>>> intake/verification system between the phone and server. An API way of
>>>>> communicating between functionality seems like the most elegant way to
>>>>> modularize (and would allow us to be more flexible on our server front-end
>>>>> as well as with phone interfaces as well), as this functionality is
>>>>> currently all intertwined in the existing system.
>>>>> Out of Lee and my discussion today, it was clear that secure API calls
>>>>> between these modular systems could be largely based on the work already
>>>>> done that you mentioned Nathan. The different servers could follow the
>>>>> same/similar verification process.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. IBA is requesting a fair amount of functionality outside of the
>>>>> scope of InformaCam
>>>>> (e.g., complex reporting, sharing with external clients, exporting
>>>>> submitted media, publishing on various outlets, etc.)
>>>>> Again, an API approach seemed like the best solution with the most
>>>>> gains. This we also considered OAuth as a good fit for. And it gives us a
>>>>> ready answer as these types of request will just keep coming...i.e., "yes,
>>>>> you can get that info through our API and use with x".
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. IBA is requesting more complex permissioning for the server-side of
>>>>> users, as well as more complex evidence logs (and more complex logs are
>>>>> required in ISO standard for digital repos)
>>>>> This led us to review SELinux and Fedora Repository which both have
>>>>> complex permissions engines involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. General thoughts have been re-occurring on Guardian and IBA sides
>>>>> about having a "published" catalog of media derivatives (e.g., to media
>>>>> outlets, or for people who might be interested, etc.). This is something
>>>>> that actually Witness already does (though not managed completely with an
>>>>> IT system). Not a pressing needs, but something to consider as we refactor
>>>>> the architecture this time around.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Lee can speak to the need he sees with Math folks and the
>>>>> permission sets.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I do think we needed to spend some time deciding how we would
>>>>> secure our "public-ish" and our internal system API(s), and go about
>>>>> building some permissions/authorization on the server-side.
>>>>>
>>>>> -barbra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Harlo Holmes <harlo.holmes at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this part of the project refers only to properly
>>>>>> authenticating IBA staff members as they interact with already-submitted
>>>>>> media. (like, who on the IBA team has access to view encrypted metadata,
>>>>>> and keeping logs of who viewed what and when.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it should be outside the loop we established previously and has
>>>>>> nothing to do with the mobile client or its users.  But Barbra can explain
>>>>>> more...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Harlo
>>>>>> On Mar 6, 2013 9:03 PM, "Nathan of Guardian" <
>>>>>> nathan at guardianproject.info> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lee Azzarello <lee at rockingtiger.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >Nathan,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Can you describe the level of detail for authorization of roles from
>>>>>>> >client to server? I don't think I understand the scope of this
>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>> >not the requirements to ensure a chain of custody in a court of law.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is what the entire InformaCam IBA project has been doing for
>>>>>>> the last year. The Chain Of Custody issue is solved based on the signing
>>>>>>> and encryption Harlo has already implemented. You should be able to post
>>>>>>> informacam blobs into the public internet, as long as they have been signed
>>>>>>> by the submitters key and encrypted to the trusted parties key. We also
>>>>>>> have the file hash submission process that is again, already designed and
>>>>>>> implemented.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only roles there were ever meant to be were 1) known or unknown
>>>>>>> person submitting a report from their device and 2) trusted party receiving
>>>>>>> report and being able to unpack and verify integrity of report blob.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know we have added additional function to the server to allow
>>>>>>> searching and browsing of reports, but super complex roles and distributed
>>>>>>> computing authenticating mechanisms seems like we are way way out of any
>>>>>>> design goals I am familiar with.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Harlo, Bryan - can you provide some clarity here? Are we getting
>>>>>>> pushed in directions by the IBA that I am not aware of?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +n
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ssc-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Post: Ssc-dev at lists.mayfirst.org
>>>>>>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>         Send email to:  Ssc-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
>>>>>>>         Or visit:
>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ssc-dev/harlo.holmes%40gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: harlo.holmes at gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ssc-dev mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Post: Ssc-dev at lists.mayfirst.org
>>>>>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>         Send email to:  Ssc-dev-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
>>>>>>         Or visit:
>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ssc-dev/blmack%40gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are subscribed as: blmack at gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/ssc-dev/attachments/20130306/005285bd/attachment.html>

More information about the Ssc-dev mailing list