W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > February 2015

RE: State, not Identity-based Credential Use Cases?

From: <Joerg.Heuer@telekom.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 11:00:03 +0100
To: <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FB5E170315856249A4C381355C027E45028BDFBC4F8E@HE100041.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Hi!

It is pretty sure that my industry would love to provide authenticated geo positions, e.g. using cellular networks' cell-ID to that game. Generating a credential for this sounds good, but I don't think that it requires a short lifespan. The information 'I was exactly at that position on that date and time' requires a timestamp in the first place, but it would be true forever, essentially, right?

Cheers,
	Jörg

-----Original Message-----
From: Manu Sporny [mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com] 
Sent: Freitag, 13. Februar 2015 19:12
To: public-credentials@w3.org
Subject: Re: State, not Identity-based Credential Use Cases?

On 02/12/2015 03:05 PM, Brian Sletten wrote:
> We generally are thinking about long-term, identity-based credentials 
> (clearly the dominant use), but I am wondering if the group thinks it 
> would be useful to also consider shorter term, state-based credentials 
> not necessarily tied to an identity.

I think the spec is badly named (others disagree). I think that this group is about credentials, for humans and machines. Which means that it doesn't matter if an ID is associated with an "identity" (as in the human sense) or an "entity" (as in, the 'could be a machine or virtual software agent') sense. Also, remember that IDs can be blank nodes (although we haven't really had a use case for it until you sent this email).

> 1) Demonstrating that you are within a particular geographic area.

This is a digitally signed credential issued to you by a machine that is trusted by the receiver. The "@id" could be a blank node, and these sorts of credentials might only be provided as 'tokens of proof' (which is what I think you're saying).

The credential would effectively state: "The bearer of this credential is at latitude x.xx, longitude y.yyy, and height z.zz."

> 2) Demonstrating that you own a token.

I think this is just an identity credential. You could do it in the same way as above.

> I don't think this necessarily changes anything about the existing 
> focus, I just wonder if there is value in considering some less 
> conventional uses of machine-processable credential standards for 
> scenarios like this. Basically, might we consider state-based 
> credentials rather than only identity-based credentials?

There is certainly value in doing that. If I squint hard enough at the spec, I think we already support this sort of thing at the data model layer. The trick would be to formalize it in a part of the spec called "Pseudo-anonymous Claims" or something in a similar vein. Will have to think about it a bit more, but seems like something we'd want to support.

-- manu

--
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2015 10:00:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:22 UTC