- From: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 15:52:20 +0100
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
On 15/06/2016 14:20, Manu Sporny wrote: > On 06/15/2016 06:09 AM, David Chadwick wrote: >> One might conclude from this that you think that FIDO will not scale >> wrt adoption. Is this a fair conclusion? > > No, I think FIDO will be just fine for same-origin use cases. > > The vast majority of our use cases are multi-origin. > > FIDO ensures that the entity that a website is speaking to is the same > entity that enrolled the security device at a previous point in time. But if s/he loses his/her smart phone (and keys) then what? Surely this is the same issue that you previously had with public keys? Why is it different? regards David > > Verifiable Claims ensure that the entity that a website is speaking to > has a certain set of qualifications that have been vetted by a trusted > 3rd party. It also ensures that those qualifications can be asserted > across multiple origins. > > Different technologies for different use cases. > > FIDO and Verifiable Claims are complimentary. > >>> Someone that disagrees is welcome to build an alternate ecosystem >>> based >>>> In terms of the arrows, I prefer Dave Crocker's version >>> >>> Good to know, thank you. Why? (out of curiosity) >> >> I think it more clearly shows the direction of flow of information, >> without getting into protocol messages or handshakes. > > Great, thanks. :) > > -- manu >
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2016 14:52:51 UTC