Hacktoberfest 2026:メンテナが10月に向けて印を付けた、オープンで初心者向けの issue。 Hacktoberfest の issue を見る

Address legal compliance, security, and privacy through Specifications

オープン
#487 コメント 6 件 リアクション 2 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
5/5
見積もり時間
1週間以上
初心者へのやさしさ
25/100
issue の種類
機能追加
明瞭さ
説明が足りない
活発さ
停滞

調査の方向性

まず、Issue にリンクされている記事、特に Section 8 を読み、その懸念事項を、リンクされている vocabulary、data-interoperability、authorization-panel の各 Issue の懸念事項と比較してください。完了とするには、スコープについてコミュニティの合意を得たうえで、対応する仕様またはドキュメントの成果物を作成する必要があります。特定のファイルやテストは指定されていません。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

Hi. An adopter or user of Solid faces the following three questions:

  1. How to describe what their implementation and use-case is regarding use of 'Solid' ?
  2. How does Solid relate to relevant laws (in my case, GDPR)?
  3. What issues or problems are applicable to Solid?

I have answered this through an article titled "Making Sense of Solid for Data Governance and GDPR" https://osf.io/m29hn/ that considers use of Solid as cloud technology which gives different possible governance models (e.g. self-hosted, pod from providers), which enables specific analysis of how Solid specifications in their current state relate to GDPR (because I focus on EU, but the issues are also broadly applicable). I found that there are important gaps and incompatibilities that result in problems and uncertainties for an adopter. These arise from specifications not containing information, processes, diverging in terminologies, etc. I also discuss how Solid is vulnerable to existing problematic practices in centralised models (e.g. see https://github.com/solid/authorization-panel/issues/46#issuecomment-1285486479 and article Section.7).

While is it possible that an adopter or end-user is also aware of the above problems, and implements solutions to fix them, IMHO this will eventually create divergence in Solid implementations, and thus challenges for portability and interoperability of data, pods, and apps. If there will be different incompatible approaches to solve common problems, we may end up with new centralised or walled models that use Solid - which would be self-defeating for Solid's goals.

Instead, IMO, Solid specifications should provide a solid (pun intended) framework that assists if not solves these issues related to legal compliance, security, privacy, and data protection, and through this provides a minimum level of trust and commonality in the use of Solid across implementations and use-cases. The article provides some ideas for this (Section.8), and there are other issues that relate to this - https://github.com/solid/vocab/issues/83 (vocab for actors), solid/data-interoperability-panel/issues/282 (separation of Agents), and solid/authorization-panel/issues/46 (trusting an app).

I'm not the first to consider the legal or privacy perspectives of Solid (the article has some good references), and I won't be the last - for example the EU's authorities are looking into Solid as part of the next potential innovative disruption (ref:EDPS). I'm also aware that there have been several discussions within Solid community (e.g. consent, use of policies) - but as there are no visible outputs and Solid is being considered for a W3C WG track, I'm requesting this be considered an important topic and the Solid community should either (1) agree that the above is an issue that needs attention; or (2) make it explicit in the specs or docs that the above is not in scope - and therefore clarify that either implementers should develop their own solutions or the community can do so as an extension or additional specification.

主要言語
HTML
スター
563
フォーク
110
平均マージ
5日 7分
マージ済み PR(30日)
3

環境構築

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

solid/specification のほかの issue

solid/specification の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Documentation の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。