W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Use-Cases - pseudo-anonymity examples

From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 09:26:47 -0800
To: public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <56D72257.2060607@sunshine.net>
On 3/1/16 9:41 PM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
> Pardon the naive question (I haven't followed the credentials work in
> detail), but how is link between the credential and the documents it is
> supposed to be associated with?

I don't know. I was assuming in the new examples I provided (anonymous 
Journalist, Scientist whistle-blower, pseudonymous Novelist) that:
   a)  it would turn out to be more or less the same code mechanism as 
the existing "June and the bottle" example would need;
   b)  some mechanisms for doing this have been discussed in the past; and
   c)  the current goal is to get the Charter accepted (work protocol 
time-lines and use-case goals), not specific data structures.

So IMO the answer to your question lies in the work that would be done 
after the Credentials technical group is underway.

But I may misunderstand the process. Can anyone else comment?

Steven


>
>
>
> Anders
>
>>
>>
>> Steven
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Steven Rowat
>>> <steven_rowat@sunshine.net <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/1/16 9:30 AM, msporny@digitalbazaar.com
>>> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Manu Sporny:  Please send feedback on the mailing list, the
>>> VCTF/Credentials CG/ or WPIG mailing list, whichever you have
>>> access to.  ...[snip]... Manu Sporny:  So also feedback on the use
>>> cases.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 to Pseudo-Anonymity remaining as an "Essential" claim as now
>>> provided in the Use Cases document. I'd be very distressed if it
>>> was chopped for any reason. Glad to see it still there! :-)
>>>
>>> But... in support of that: to get future readers of the document to
>>> agree on its importance, I believe the single scenario given (June
>>> going to buy a bottle of wine and not wishing to divulge anything
>>> other than age) doesn't adequately convey the scope of why this is
>>> essential, society-wide.
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of the more specific 'protection from known danger'
>>> scenarios, such as: journalists reporting from countries that
>>> threaten them with death, scientists whistleblowing from corporate
>>> crime, novelists writing about their own dysfunctional social
>>> milieu.
>>>
>>> Any of these scenarios may be of large value to the society, and to
>>> work best, or work at all in some cases, they require that we can
>>> identify the origin of the conveyed information as trustworthy
>>> without needing the originator to broadcast publicly their personal
>>> contact information.
>>>
>>> June and the bottle doesn't convey those use-cases for me, although
>>> it's technically still a pseudo-anonymity. It's important also, but
>>> different. So I think we need at least one of each kind.
>>>
>>>
>>> Steven Rowat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Shane McCarron Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2016 17:27:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 17:27:20 UTC