- From: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:13:34 +0100
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
On 11/06/2016 18:31, Steven Rowat wrote: > On 6/11/16 9:46 AM, Manu Sporny wrote: >> On 06/11/2016 07:27 AM, David Chadwick wrote: >>> By using a common ID for two different identity profiles we produce >>> a correlation handle for the relying parties. >> >> Yes, correlation handles are REQUIRED for a number of use cases. >> Pseudo-anonymity is REQUIRED for others. We need both. >> >> For example: >> >> You get a driver's license from Entity A. >> You get a proof of employment from Entity B. >> >> A bank asks you to submit both to open a new account. In a non-common ID >> scenario, how does an automated software program determine that the >> driver's license and the proof of employment are talking about the same >> identifier? > > I'm not seeing a problem with this yet with the John (entity) and Alfred > and Bob (pseudonyms) example. Only the pseudonym "Alfred" will be used > to represent a single person, and so only one identifier will be used > for the license, the proof of employment, and the Bank (for Alfred). I dont think so. What you are describing seems to be just like the cat example. The point Manu is making I believe, is that the credentials have been issued by different trusted issuers, and therefore contain different IDs. regards David > > If the government gets a warrant to find out who Alfred is, they can, > and somewhere there will exist a registry that links John and Alfred's > separate ids. > > Steven > > > >
Received on Saturday, 11 June 2016 18:14:01 UTC