Internet DRAFT - draft-soilandreyes-arcp
draft-soilandreyes-arcp
Network Working Group S. Soiland-Reyes
Internet-Draft The University of Manchester
Intended status: Informational M. Caceres
Expires: August 9, 2018 Mozilla Corporation
February 05, 2018
The Archive and Package (arcp) URI scheme
draft-soilandreyes-arcp-03
Abstract
This specification define the Archive and Package URI scheme "arcp".
arcp URIs can be used to consume or reference hypermedia resources
bundled inside a file archive or an application package, as well as
to resolve URIs for archive resources within a programmatic
framework.
This URI scheme provides mechanisms to generate a unique base URI to
represent the root of the archive, so that relative URI references in
a bundled resource can be resolved within the archive without having
to extract the archive content on the local file system.
An arcp URI can be used for purposes of isolation (e.g. when
consuming multiple archives), security constraints (avoiding "climb
out" from the archive), or for externally identiyfing sub-resources
referenced by hypermedia formats.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 9, 2018.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Scheme syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Scheme semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Authority semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Path semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. Resolution protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4. Resolving from a .well-known endpoint . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Encoding considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Interoperability considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix A. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.1. Sandboxing base URI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.2. Location-based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
A.3. Hash-based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
A.4. Archives that are not files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A.5. Linked Data containers which are not on the web . . . . . 18
A.6. Resolution of packaged resources . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
A.7. Sharing using app names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix B. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
1. Introduction
Mobile and Web Applications may bundle resources such as stylesheets
with _relative URI references_ [RFC3986] (4.2 [1]) to scripts, images
and fonts. Resolving and parsing such resources within URI handling
frameworks may require generating absolute URIs and applying Same-
Origin [RFC6454] security policies separately for each app.
Software that is accessing resources bundled inside an archive (e.g.
"zip" or "tar.gz" file) can struggle to consume hypermedia content
types that use relative URI references such as "../css/", as it is
challenging to establishing the _base URI_ [RFC3986] (5.1 [2]) in a
consistent fashion.
Frequently the archive might be unpacked locally, implying base URIs
like "file:///tmp/a1b27ae03865/" to represent the root of the
archive. Such URIs are temporary, might not be globally unique, and
could be vulnerable to attacks such as "climbing out" of the root
directory.
An archive containing multiple HTML or Linked Data resources, such as
in a BagIt archive [I-D.draft-kunze-bagit-14], may be using relative
URIs to cross-reference constituent files, making it challenging to
index or annotate such resources.
Consumption of an archive with a consistent base URL should be
possible no matter from which location it was retrieved, on which
device it is inspected, and with which mechanism the archive is
accessed (e.g. virtual file system).
When consuming multiple archives from untrusted sources it would be
beneficial to have a Same Origin policy [RFC6454] so that relative
hyperlinks can't escape the particular archive.
The "file:" URI scheme [RFC8089] can be ill-suited for purposes such
as above, while a location-independent URI scheme can be more
flexible, secure and globally unique.
This specification define the Archive and Package URI scheme "arcp"
as an alternative to addressing resources within an archive,
application or package.
For the purpose of this specification, an *archive* is a collection
of sub-resources addressable by name or path. This definition covers
typical archive file formats like ".zip" or "tar.gz" and derived
"+zip" media types [RFC6839], but also non-file resource packages
like an LDP Container [W3C.REC-ldp-20150226], an installed Web App
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
[W3C.WD-appmanifest-20180118], or a BagIt folder structure
[I-D.draft-kunze-bagit-14].
For brevity, the term _archive_ is used throughout this
specification, although from the above it can also mean a
_container_, _application_, _aggregation_ or _package_.
The main purpose of arcp URIs is to provide consistent identifiers as
absolute URIs for nested resources. This specification does not
define a new network protocol, however it suggests an abstract
resolution protocol that implementations can apply using existing
protocols or programming frameworks.
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Scheme syntax
The "arcp" URI scheme follows the [RFC3986] syntax for hierarchical
URIs according to the following productions:
arcp-URI = arcp-scheme ":" arcp-specific [ "#" fragment ]
arcp-scheme = "arcp"
arcp-specific = "//" arcp-authority [ path-absolute ] [ "?" query ]
The "arcp-authority" component provides a unique identifier for the
opened archive. See Section 3.1 for details.
The "path-absolute" component provides the absolute path of a
resource (e.g. a file or directory) within the archive. See
Section 3.2 for details.
The "query" component MAY be used, but its semantics is undefined by
this specification.
The "fragment" component MAY be used by implementations according to
[RFC3986] and the implied media type [RFC2046] of the resource at the
path. This specification does not specify how to determine the media
type.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
3.1. Authority
The purpose of the "authority" component in an arcp URI is to build a
unique identifier for a particular archive. The authority is NOT
intended to be resolvable without former knowledge of the archive.
The authority of an arcp URI MUST be valid according to these
productions:
arcp-authority = uuid | ni | name | authority
uuid = "uuid," UUID
ni = "ni," alg-val
name = "name," reg-name
1. The prefix "uuid," combines with the "UUID" production as defined
in [RFC4122], e.g. "uuid,2a47c495-ac70-4ed1-850b-8800a57618cf"
2. The prefix "ni," combines with the "alg-val" production as
defined in [RFC6920], e.g. "ni,sha-
256;JCS7yveugE3UaZiHCs1XpRVfSHaewxAKka0o5q2osg8"
3. The prefix "name," combines with the "reg-name" production as
defined in [RFC3986], e.g. "name,app.example.com". For arcp IRIs
[RFC3987], its "ireg-name" production applies instead of "reg-
name".
4. The production "authority" matches its definition in [RFC3986],
or "iauthority" for arcp IRIs [RFC3987]. As this necessarily
also match the above prefixed productions, those should be
considered first before falling back to this production.
3.2. Path
The "path-absolute" component, if present, MUST match the production
in [RFC3986], or "ipath-absolute" for arcp IRIs [RFC3987]. This
provide the absolute path of a resource (e.g. a file or directory)
within the archive.
Archive media types vary in constraints and possibilities on how to
express paths, however implementations SHOULD use "/" as path
separator for nested folders and files.
It is RECOMMENDED to include the trailing "/" if it is known that the
path represents a directory.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
4. Scheme semantics
This specification does not constrain what format might constitute an
_archive_, and neither does it require that the archive is
retrievable as a single bytestream or file.
Examples of retrievable archive media types include "application/
zip", "application/vnd.android.package-archive", "application/x-tar",
"application/x-gtar" and "application/x-7z-compressed".
Examples of non-file archives include an LDP Container
[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226], an installed Web App
[W3C.WD-appmanifest-20180118], or a BagIt folder structure
[I-D.draft-kunze-bagit-14].
4.1. Authority semantics
The _authority_ component identifies the archive itself.
Implementations MAY assume that two arcp URIs with the same authority
component relate to resources within the same archive, subject to
limitations explained in this section.
The authority prefix, if present, helps to inform consumers what
uniqueness constraints have been used when identifying the archive,
without necessarily providing access to the archive.
1. If the prefix is "uuid," followed by a UUID [RFC4122], this
indicates a unique archive identity. Applications MAY assume
that the corresponding "urn:uuid:" URI identifies the archive.
2. If the prefix is "uuid," followed by a v4 UUID [RFC4122] (4.4
[3]), this indicate uniqueness based on a random number
generator.
Implementations creating random-based authorities SHOULD generate
the v4 random UUID using a suitable random number generator
[RFC4086].
3. If the prefix is "uuid," followed by a v5 name-based UUID
[RFC4122] (4.3 [4]), this indicates uniqueness based on an
existing archive location, typically an URL.
Implementations creating location-based authorities SHOULD
generate the v5 UUID using the URL namespace "6ba7b811-9dad-
11d1-80b4-00c04fd430c8" and an retrievable archive URL. Note
that while implementations cannot resolve which location was
used, they can confirm the name-based UUID if the location is
otherwise known.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
4. If the prefix is "ni," this indicates a unique archive identity
based on a hashing of the archive's bytestream or content.
Implementations MAY assume that resources within an "ni" arcp
URIs remains static, although the implementation may use content
negotiation or similar transformations.
The checksum MUST be expressed according to the "alg-val"
production in [RFC6920] (3 [5]). Implementations creating hash-
based authorities from an archive's bytestream SHOULD use the
hash method "sha-256" without truncation. Implementations MAY
assume that the corresponding "ni:" URI identifies the archive.
5. If the prefix is "name," this indicates that the authority is an
application or package name, typically as installed on a device
or system.
Implementations SHOULD assume that an unrecognised "name"
authority is only unique within a particular installation, but
MAY assume further uniqueness guarantees for names under their
control.
It is RECOMMENDED that implementations creating name-based
authorities use DNS names under their control, for instance an
app installed as "app.example.com" can make an authority
"name,app.example.com" to refer to its packaged resources, or
"name,foo.app.example.com" to refer to its dynamic container of
"foo" resources.
The uniqueness properties are *unspecified* for arcp URIs which
authority do not match any of the prefixes defined in this
specification.
4.2. Path semantics
The _path_ component of an arcp URI identify individual resources
within a particular archive, typically a _directory_ or _file_.
o If the _path_ is "/" - e.g. <arcp://uuid,833ebda2-f9a8-4462-b74a-
4fcdc1a02d22/> - then the arcp URI represent the archive itself,
typically represented as a root directory or collection.
o If the path ends with "/" then the path represents a directory or
collection.
The arcp URIs can be used for uniquely identifying resources within
an archive, such as in an information system considering multiple
archives.
Assuming an appropriate mechanism which have knowledge of the
corresponding archive, an arcp URI can also be used for resolution.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
Some archive formats might permit resources with the same (duplicate)
path, in which case it is undefined from this specification which
particular entry is described.
4.3. Resolution protocol
This specification do not define a network protocol to resolve
resources according to the arcp URI scheme. For instance, one
implementation might rewrite arcp URIs to localized paths in a
temporary directory, while another implementation might use an
embedded HTTP server.
It is envisioned that an implementation will have accessed an archive
in advance, and assigned it an appropriate authority according to
Section 3.1. Such an implementation can then resolve arcp URIs, e.g.
by using in-memory archive access or mapping arcp paths to the the
local file system.
Implementations that support resolving arcp URIs SHOULD:
1. Fail with the equivalent of _Not Found_ if the authority is
unknown.
2. Fail with the equivalent of _Gone_ if the authority is known, but
the content of the archive is no longer available.
3. Fail with the equivalent of _Not Found_ if the path does not map
to a resource within the archive.
4. Return the corresponding (potentially uncompressed) bytestream if
the path maps to a file within the archive.
5. Return an appropriate directory listing if the path maps to a
directory within the archive.
6. Return an appropriate directory listing of the archive's root
directory if the path is "/".
Implementations MAY support other ways to resolve arcp URIs, e.g.
query parameters or content negotiation.
Not all archive formats or implementations will have the concept of a
directory listing, in which case the implementation MAY fail such
resolutions with the equivalent of "Not Implemented".
It is not undefined by this specification how an implementation can
determine the media type of a file within an archive. This could be
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
expressed in secondary resources (such as a manifest), be determined
by file extensions or magic bytes.
The media type "text/uri-list" [RFC2483] MAY be used to represent a
directory listing, in which case it SHOULD contain only URIs with the
arcp URI of the directory as a common base.
Some archive formats might support resources which are neither
directories nor regular files (e.g. device files, symbolic links).
This specification does not define the semantics of attempting to
resolve such resources.
This specification does not define how to change an archive or its
content using arcp URIs.
4.4. Resolving from a .well-known endpoint
If the "authority" component of an arcp URI matches the "alg-val"
production, an application MAY assume corresponding "ni:///" or
"nih:" URIs [RFC6920] identify the archive bytestream or content.
Applications MAY attempt to retrieve the corresponding archive from
any ".well-known/ni/" endpoint [RFC5785] as specified in [RFC6920] (4
[6]). Applications SHOULD verify the checksum of the retrieved
archive before resolving individual arcp paths.
5. Encoding considerations
The productions for "uuid" and "ni" are restricted to URI safe ASCII
and should not require any encoding considerations.
When arcp is used in IRIs [RFC3987], the "name" production permit
Unicode characters corresponding to its "ireg-name" production.
Care should be taken to %-encode the directory and file segments of
"path-absolute" according to [RFC3986] for URIs or "ipath-absolute"
[RFC3987] for IRIs.
Not all archive formats have an explicit character encoding specified
for their paths. If no such information is available for the archive
format, implementations MAY assume that the path component is encoded
with UTF-8 [RFC2279].
Some archive formats have case-insensitive paths, in which cases it
is RECOMMENDED to preserve the casing as expressed in the archive.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
6. Interoperability considerations
As multiple authorities are possible for the same archive
(Section 3.1), and path interpretation might vary, there can be
interoperability challenges when exchanging arcp URIs between
implementations. Some considerations:
1. Two implementations describe the same archive (e.g. stored in the
same local file path), but using different random-based UUID
authorities. The implementations may need to detect equality of
the two UUIDs out of band.
2. Two implementations describe an archive retrieved from the same
URL, with the same location-based UUID authority, but retrieved
at different times. The implementations might disagree about the
content of the archive.
3. Two implementations describe an archive retrieved from the same
URL, with the same location-based UUID authority, but retrieved
using different content negotiation resulting in different
archive formats. The implementations may disagree about path
encoding, file name casing or hierarchy.
4. Two implementations describe the same archive bytestream using
the hash-based authority, but they have used two different hash
algorithms. The implementations may need to negotiate to a
common hash algorithm.
5. Two implementations access the same archive, which contain file
paths with Unicode characters, but extracted to two different
file systems. Limitations and conventions for file names in the
local file system (such as Unicode normalization, case
insensitivity, total path length) may result in the
implementations having inconsistent or inaccessible paths.
7. Security Considerations
As when handling any content, extra care should be taken when
consuming archives and arcp URIs from unknown sources.
Archives might contain malicious or inappropriate content or file
paths.
An archive could contain compressed files that expand to fill all
available disk space.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
A maliciously crafted archive could contain paths with characters
(e.g. backspace) which could make an arcp URI invalid or misleading
if used unescaped.
A maliciously crafted archive could contain paths with character
combinations (e.g. combined Unicode sequences, text orientation
change) that cause the arcp URI to be very long or disruptive when
rendered in an user interface.
An archive might contain symbolic links that, if extracted to a local
file system, might address files outside the archive's directory
structure. Implementations SHOULD detect such links and prevent
outside access.
An maliciously crafted arcp URI might contain "../" path segments,
which if naively converted to a "file:///" URI might address files
outside the archive's directory structure. Implementations SHOULD
perform Path Segment Normalization [RFC3986] before converting arcp
URIs.
In particular for IRIs, an archive might contain multiple paths with
similar-looking characters or with different Unicode combine
sequences, which could be used to mislead users.
An URI hyperlink might use or guess an arcp URI authority to attempt
to climb into a different archive for malicious purposes.
Applications SHOULD employ Same Orgin policy [RFC6454] checks if
resolving cross-references is not desired.
While a UUID or hash-based authority provide some level of
information hiding of an archive's origin, this should not be relied
upon for access control or anonymisation. Implementors should keep
in mind that such authority components in many cases can be
predictably generated by third-parties, for instance using dictionary
attacks.
8. IANA Considerations
This specification requests that IANA registers the following URI
scheme according to the provisions of [RFC7595].
Scheme name: arcp
Status: provisional
Applications/protocols that use this protocol: Hypermedia-consuming
application that handle archives or packages.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
Contact: Stian Soiland-Reyes stain@apache.org [7]
Change controller: Stian Soiland-Reyes
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2279] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
10646", RFC 2279, DOI 10.17487/RFC2279, January 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2279>.
[RFC2483] Mealling, M. and R. Daniel, "URI Resolution Services
Necessary for URN Resolution", RFC 2483,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2483, January 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2483>.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.
[RFC3987] Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource
Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987,
January 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987>.
[RFC4086] Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker,
"Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4086, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4086>.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122>.
[RFC5785] Nottingham, M. and E. Hammer-Lahav, "Defining Well-Known
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 5785,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5785, April 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5785>.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
[RFC6454] Barth, A., "The Web Origin Concept", RFC 6454,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6454, December 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6454>.
[RFC6920] Farrell, S., Kutscher, D., Dannewitz, C., Ohlman, B.,
Keranen, A., and P. Hallam-Baker, "Naming Things with
Hashes", RFC 6920, DOI 10.17487/RFC6920, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6920>.
[RFC7595] Thaler, D., Ed., Hansen, T., and T. Hardie, "Guidelines
and Registration Procedures for URI Schemes", BCP 35,
RFC 7595, DOI 10.17487/RFC7595, June 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7595>.
9.2. Informative References
[FirefoxOS]
Mozilla Firefox, "Firefox OS security overview",
MDN Mozilla Developer Network Web Docs, February 2017,
<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Archive/B2G_OS/Security/
Security_model#Packaged_Apps>.
[I-D.draft-kunze-bagit-14]
Kunze, J., Littman, J., Madden, L., Summers, E., Boyko,
A., and B. Vargas, "The BagIt File Packaging Format
(V0.97)", draft-kunze-bagit-14 (work in progress), October
2016.
[RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2046, November 1996,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046>.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC6570] Gregorio, J., Fielding, R., Hadley, M., Nottingham, M.,
and D. Orchard, "URI Template", RFC 6570,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6570>.
[RFC6839] Hansen, T. and A. Melnikov, "Additional Media Type
Structured Syntax Suffixes", RFC 6839,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6839, January 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6839>.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
[RFC8089] Kerwin, M., "The "file" URI Scheme", RFC 8089,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8089, February 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8089>.
[ROBundle]
Soiland-Reyes, S., Gamble, M., and R. Haines, "Research
Object Bundle 1.0", Zenodo report,
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.12586, November 2014,
<https://w3id.org/bundle/>.
[W3C.NOTE-app-uri-20150723]
Caceres, M., "The app: URL Scheme", World Wide Web
Consortium NOTE NOTE-app-uri-20150723, July 2015,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-app-uri-20150723>.
[W3C.NOTE-widgets-uri-20120313]
Caceres, M., "Widget URI scheme", World Wide Web
Consortium NOTE NOTE-widgets-uri-20120313, March 2012,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-widgets-uri-20120313>.
[W3C.REC-ldp-20150226]
Speicher, S., Arwe, J., and A. Malhotra, "Linked Data
Platform 1.0", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation
REC-ldp-20150226, February 2015,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226>.
[W3C.WD-appmanifest-20180118]
Caceres, M., Christiansen, K., Lamouri, M., Kostiainen,
A., and R. Dolin, "Web App Manifest", World Wide Web
Consortium WD WD-appmanifest-20180118, January 2018,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/WD-appmanifest-20180118>.
9.3. URIs
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-4.2
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.1
[3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122#section-4.4
[4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122#section-4.3
[5] https://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc6920#section-3
[6] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6920#section-4
[7] mailto:stain@apache.org
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
Appendix A. Examples
A.1. Sandboxing base URI
An document store application has received a file "document.tar.gz"
which content will be checked for consistency.
For sandboxing purposes it generates a UUID v4 "32a423d6-52ab-47e3-
a9cd-54f418a48571" using a pseudo-random generator. The arcp base
URI is thus:
arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/
The archive contains the files:
o "./doc.html" which links to "css/base.css"
o "./css/base.css" which links to "../fonts/Foo.woff"
o "./fonts/Foo.woff"
The application generates the corresponding arcp URIs and uses those
for URI resolutions to list resources and their hyperlinks:
arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/doc.html
-> arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/css/base.css
arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/css/base.css
-> arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/fonts/Foo.woff
arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/fonts/Foo.woff
The application is now confident that all hyperlinked files are
indeed present in the archive. In its database it notes which
"tar.gz" file corresponds to UUID "32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-
54f418a48571".
If the application had encountered a malicious hyperlink
"../../../outside.txt" it would first resolve it to the absolute URI
<arcp://uuid,32a423d6-52ab-47e3-a9cd-54f418a48571/outside.txt> and
conclude from the "Not Found" error that the path "/outside.txt" was
not present in the archive.
A.2. Location-based
A web crawler is about to index the content of the URL
"http://example.com/data.zip" and need to generate absolute URIs as
it continues crawling inside the individual resources of the archive.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
The application generates a UUID v5 based on the URL namespace
"6ba7b811-9dad-11d1-80b4-00c04fd430c8" and the URL to the zip file:
>>> uuid.uuid5(uuid.NAMESPACE_URL, "http://example.com/data.zip")
UUID('b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065')
Thus the location-based arcp URI for indexing the ZIP content is
arcp://uuid,b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065/
Listing all directories and files in the ZIP, the crawler finds the
URIs:
arcp://uuid,b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065/
arcp://uuid,b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065/pics/
arcp://uuid,b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065/pics/flower.jpeg
When the application encounters "http://example.com/data.zip" some
time later it can recalculate the same base arcp URI. This time the
ZIP file has been modified upstream and the crawler finds
additionally:
arcp://uuid,b7749d0b-0e47-5fc4-999d-f154abe68065/pics/cloud.jpeg
If files had been removed from the updated ZIP file the crawler can
simply remove those from its database, as it used the same arcp base
URI as in last crawl.
A.3. Hash-based
A repository where users can annotate content of open source software
distributions needs to avoid duplication, as users tend to upload
"foo-1.2.tar" multiple times.
The repository calculates the "sha-256" checksum of the uploaded file
to be in hexadecimal:
7f83b1657ff1fc53b92dc18148a1d65dfc2d4b1fa3d677284addd200126d9069
The "base64url" encoding [RFC4648] of the binary version of the
checksum is:
f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk
The corresponding "alg-val" authority [RFC6920] is thus:
sha-256;f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
From this the hash-based arcp base URL is:
arcp://ni,sha-256;f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk/
The repository adds annotations for detected source code files within
the archive.
A client is browsing the annotations and discovers:
arcp://ni,sha-256;f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk/src/luhn.c
The client constructs the corresponding "ni" URI [RFC6920]:
ni:///sha-256;f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk/
To retrieve the archive from "repo.example.com", the client resolve
the corresponding ".well-known" URI [RFC5785]:
http://repo.example.com/.well-known/
ni/sha-256/f4OxZX_x_FO5LcGBSKHWXfwtSx-j1ncoSt3SABJtkGk/
After the client verifies the corresponding "sha-256" checksum it
reads the path "/src/luhn.c" from the retrieved archive.
A.4. Archives that are not files
An application is storing BagIt archives [I-D.draft-kunze-bagit-14]
on a shared file system, using structured "bag" folders and manifests
rather than individual archive files.
The BagIt payload manifest "/gfs/bags/scan15/manifest-md5.txt" lists
the files:
49afbd86a1ca9f34b677a3f09655eae9 data/27613-h/q172.png
408ad21d50cef31da4df6d9ed81b01a7 data/27613-h/q172.txt
The application generates a random UUID v4 "ff2d5a82-7142-4d3f-b8cc-
3e662d6de756" and adds the corresponding "urn:uuid" UUID to the bag
metadata file "/gfs/bags/scan15/bag-info.txt"
External-Identifier: urn:uuid:ff2d5a82-7142-4d3f-b8cc-3e662d6de756/
It then generates arcp URIs for the files listed in the manifest:
arcp://uuid,ff2d5a82-7142-4d3f-b8cc-3e662d6de756/data/27613-h/q172.png
arcp://uuid,ff2d5a82-7142-4d3f-b8cc-3e662d6de756/data/27613-h/q172.txt
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
When a different application on the same shared file system encounter
these arcp URIs, it can match them to the correct bag folder by
inspecting the "External-Identifier" metadata.
A.5. Linked Data containers which are not on the web
An application exposes in-memory objects of an Address Book as a
Linked Data Platform container [W3C.REC-ldp-20150226], but addressing
the container using arcp URIs instead of http to avoid network
exposure.
The arcp URIs are used in conjuction with a generic LDP client
library (developed for http), but connected to the application's URI
resolution mechanism.
The application generates a new random UUID v4 "12f89f9c-e6ca-
4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a" for the address book, and provides the
corresponding arcp URI to the LDP client:
arcp://uuid,12f89f9c-e6ca-4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a/
The LDP client resolves the container with content negotiation for
the "text/turtle" media type, and receives:
@base <arcp://uuid,12f89f9c-e6ca-4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a/>.
@prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
<arcp://uuid,12f89f9c-e6ca-4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a/>
a ldp:BasicContainer;
dcterms:title "Address book";
ldp:contains <contact1>, <contact2>.
The LDP client resolves the relative URIs to retrieve each of the
contacts:
arcp://uuid,12f89f9c-e6ca-4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a/contact1
arcp://uuid,12f89f9c-e6ca-4032-ae73-46b68c2b415a/contact2
A.6. Resolution of packaged resources
A virtual file system driver on a mobile operating system has mounted
several packaged applications for resolving common resources. An
application requests the rendering framework to resolve a picture to
show it within a user interface:
<img src="arcp://name,app.example.com/img/logo.png"
alt="App" />
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
The framework finds the corresponding application package, installed
as "app.example.com". It then checks that the authority
"name,app.example.com" is valid to access according to the Same
Origin policies or permissions of the running application.
The framework resolves "/img/logo.png" from within that package, and
returns an image buffer it already had cached in memory.
A.7. Sharing using app names
A photo gallery application on a mobile device uses arcp URIs for
navigation between its UI states. The gallery is secured so that
other applications can't normally access its photos.
The application is installed as the app name "gallery.example.org" as
the vendor controls "example.org", making the corresponding name-
based arcp URI:
arcp://name,gallery.example.org/
A user is at the application state which shows the newest photos as
thumbnails:
arcp://name,gallery.example.org/photos/?New
The user selects a photo, rendered with metadata overlaid:
arcp://name,gallery.example.org/photos/137
The user requests to "share" the photo, selecting
"messaging.example.com" which uses a common arcp URI framework on the
device.
The photo gallery registers with the device's arcp framework that the
chosen "messaging.example.com" should get read permission to its
"/photos/137" resource.
The sharing function returns a URI Template [RFC6570]:
arcp://name,messaging.example.com/share;+{uri};{+redirect}
Filling in the template, the gallery requests to pop up:
arcp://name,messaging.example.com/share
;uri=arcp://gallery.example.org/photos/137
;redirect=arcp://gallery.example.org/photos/%3fNew
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
The arcp framework checks its registration for
"messaging.example.com" and finds the installed messaging
application. It performs permission checks that other apps are
allowed to navigate to its "/share" state.
The messaging app is launched and navigates to its "sharing" UI,
asking the user for a caption.
The messaging app requests the arcp framework to retrieve the "uri"
<arcp://name,gallery.example.org/photos/137> using content
negotiation for an "image/jpeg" representation.
The arcp framework finds the installed photo gallery
"gallery.example.org", and confirms the read permission.
The photo gallery application returns a scaled down JPEG
representation after retrieving the photo from its internal store.
After the messaging app has completed sharing the picture bytestream,
it request the UI framework to navigate to the "redirect" state:
arcp://name,gallery.example.org/photos/?New
The UI returns to the original view in the photo gallery.
This example shows that although an arcp URI represents a resource,
it can have different representations or views in different apps.
Appendix B. Acknowledgements
This specification is inspired by two original URI scheme proposals
from W3C, "app" from [W3C.NOTE-app-uri-20150723] and "widget" from
[W3C.NOTE-widgets-uri-20120313].
The "app" URI scheme was used by packaged web apps in Mozilla's
Firefox OS [FirefoxOS] and to identify resources in Research Object
Bundles [ROBundle], however the W3C Notes did not progress further as
W3C Recommendation track documents, and their URI schemes were never
formally registered with IANA.
While the focus of the previous proposals was to specify how to
resolve resources from within a packaged application, this
specification generalize the URI scheme to support referencing and
identifying resources within any archive, package or application, and
adding flexibility for how resources can be resolved.
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft arcp February 2018
The authors would like to thank Graham Klyne, Carsten Bormann, Roy T.
Fielding, S Moonesamy, Julian Reschke and Frank Ellermann for
valuable feedback and suggestions.
Authors' Addresses
Stian Soiland-Reyes
The University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester
United Kingdom
Email: stain@apache.org
URI: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Marcos Caceres
Mozilla Corporation
Email: marcos@marcosc.com
URI: http://marcosc.com/
Soiland-Reyes & Caceres Expires August 9, 2018 [Page 21]
