Difference between revisions of "Decentralized ID"
From MgmtWiki
(→Full Title or Meme) |
(→Context) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
*In this wiki the IAP ([[Identifier or Attribute Provider]]) supply a [[Data Category]] only when that category has [[User Consent]]. To get all of those categories that the [[Relying Party]] requires, the request needs to go to a [[User Agent]] that is able to release the data held across many providers, some of the [[Thousand Points of Light]] that apply to the real-world [[User]], but only those appropriate for the [[Relying Party]] request are enabled by the user. | *In this wiki the IAP ([[Identifier or Attribute Provider]]) supply a [[Data Category]] only when that category has [[User Consent]]. To get all of those categories that the [[Relying Party]] requires, the request needs to go to a [[User Agent]] that is able to release the data held across many providers, some of the [[Thousand Points of Light]] that apply to the real-world [[User]], but only those appropriate for the [[Relying Party]] request are enabled by the user. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Solutions== | ==Solutions== | ||
Revision as of 16:51, 7 September 2018
Full Title or Meme
A means to distribute the sources of Identifiers and Attributes while giving more choice to Users.
Context
- Distributed ID is a somewhat different concept in that it envisions an identity which is broken into may pieces that are hosted by many different authorities and only brought together in a Relying Party upon User Consent.
- The current paradigm in open identity is for each conforming Relying Party to provide a list of Identifier or Attribute Providers that the User could chose from to allow access.
- In this model it was up to the Relying Party to establish a link and share a secret with the Identifier or Attribute Provider in advance of any transactions.
- It also required the user to pre-register with one or more of those providers, typically one of the big social sites, like: Google, Microsoft or Facebook.
- The current most common protocol for some sort of a Distributed Identity was OpenID Connect which included Self-issued Identity, but that concept never succeeded in the marketplace.
- Now other organizations believe that they can succeed where the OpenID foundation failed.
Problems
- The big problem is Trust where there are no standards or examples of any trust without a history of trusted behavior.
- Beware of time-stamping services posing as trust anchors. Bellcore created such a service in the early 1990 and spun it off into a separate company in 1994.[1] None of these services provide any trust in the contents of the documents.
- Proof of Persistent Identity must be provided. This can be little more than the inclusion of a public key in a blockchain, but that cannot provide any Assurance of protection of the Credential.
Solutions
- The Decentralized Identity Foundation has been created to enable "an open source decentralized identity ecosystem for people, organizations, apps, and devices". The have a list of areas of interest[2] that include block-chain and universal discovery which seem to be diametrically opposite of Privacy legislation like the GDPR and California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018.
- In this wiki the IAP (Identifier or Attribute Provider) supply a Data Category only when that category has User Consent. To get all of those categories that the Relying Party requires, the request needs to go to a User Agent that is able to release the data held across many providers, some of the Thousand Points of Light that apply to the real-world User, but only those appropriate for the Relying Party request are enabled by the user.
Solutions
Self-sovereign identities seem to be the answer to all parties' concerns. [3] The only problem with it that I can see is that no one seems to know exactly what it is or how it might work. MIT has started an open source effort to build something[4] but no one seems to know what.
References
- Decentralized Digital Identities and Blockchain perspective from Microsoft
