Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

pcplantdb - [pcplantdb] data/security model proposal

pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: pcplantdb

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Chad Knepp <pyg@galatea.org>
  • To: pcplantdb@lists.ibiblio.org, piw@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Cc:
  • Subject: [pcplantdb] data/security model proposal
  • Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:14:45 -0600

Hello everyone,

I have a new topic for discussion which is the data model (and its
security implications) for piw. Most of this I've discussed at
various times in smaller portions but here it is all together.

The basic points:

o All data in the dataset is owned by a user/author. Under this
proposal I'm suggesting that the current dataset by attributed to
the user/author of something like "PFAF/Ken Fern"

o Users/authors can add/edit/delete objects which under the scope of
this current iteration consist of plants, comments, and
relationships. (Users are also objects but do not have the write
access by anyone.) The "PFAF/Ken Fern" elements will not be
editable unless some designated representative of PFAF desires to
do so. I'm inclined to discourage write access to this account
(see security implications).

o Writeable objects will be open to peer review/moderation which
will affect display priority (higher ranking elements will move to
the top of the page) and be filterable (very low ranking elements
can be selected to not display) PFAF objects will start with the
highest (or near highest) score possible. This may not be
implemented in this iteration, but is the proposed method of
differentiation.

o The core part of the plant object will be its botanical name.
This allows attachment of multiple descriptions (the 30+ plant
attributes), botanical name synonyms, and common names without the
need to duplicate the more authoratative botanical name (although
this would be possible if desired or in the case of an addition of
a new plant)

o The elements of the current plant report that are titled Cultural
Notes, Propagation Notes, Known Hazards, Edible Uses, Medicinal
Uses, and Other Uses will become comments by PFAF attached to the
plant object (with a high score)

o Registered user/authors (only) have the ability to moderate the
perceived value of information by increasing (and possibly
decreasing) its relative score. This ability should probably have
some limitations (suggestions?).

Security implications:

o Being a decentralized data model, an account compromise can at
worst cause a data loss of the contents of the data of that
specific user/author, and possibly spurious moderation.

o Security is less critical with this model which means less than
best practice authentication methods are more acceptable such
as clear text transmission of authentication data.

Anyway, think about it and let me know what y'all think.

Cheers,
Chad

--
Chad Knepp
python -c 'import base64;print base64.decodestring("cHlnQGdhbGF0ZWEub3Jn")'




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page