W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vc-wg@w3.org > April 2019

Re: Electronic Driving Licenses

From: Karyl Fowler <karyl@transmute.industries>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:56:50 -0500
Message-ID: <CAB7NWmjKQK7wfPfY3tK_tLx4+d3P972JysxRm7xQN_JkQcDDkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
Cc: Oliver Terbu <oliver.terbu@consensys.net>, public-vc-wg@w3.org
Hi David -

Here is what I know about the program in Texas:

   - This is the 3rd session this pilot program was proposed [the report I
   shared was a result of this not passing in prior legislative session.
   - This session, there are two associated bills: HB 181 [which has
   already passed] and a companion SB 991 [which is going to the floor - via
   the HS committee]
   - This pilot is already funded via existing budgets within the DMV; the
   fiscal note attached to these bills cites no fiscal impact, making it
   easier to approve.

Best,
-- 


*KARYL FOWLER*Chief Executive Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://www.transmute.industries/>

ᐧ

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:44 PM David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
wrote:

> Hi Karyl
>
> thankyou for sharing this with the group. I note that the report
> recommends a pilot project for digital driving licenses. Do you know if
> the pilot has started yet, and if so, when the results might become
> available
>
> Kind regards
>
> David
>
> On 23/04/2019 17:52, Karyl Fowler wrote:
> > I have been following this discussion as I interact with legislators in
> > Texas on electronic drivers license bills on the floor here.
> >
> > Attached is a 2016 report Rep. Goodwin's office shared with me detailing
> > our state's primary concerns for establishing e-licenses. This is more
> > of a policy framing, but some of the tech challenges are consistent
> > across states/the U.S. and have been helpful to my company's work in
> > this space.
> >
> > Best,
> > --
> >
> > *KARYL FOWLER
> > *Chief Executive Officer
> > www.transmute.industries
> >
> > <https://www.transmute.industries/>
> >
> >
> > ᐧ
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:12 AM David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk
> > <mailto:D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi Oliver
> >
> >     Yes I think we should try to influence the standard if possible. They
> >     are clearly influenced by other standards otherwise they would not be
> >     looking into OIDC and CBOR. Since we believe VCs are superior and
> >     designed for driving licenses then we should try to sell VCs to them.
> >
> >     Kind regards
> >
> >     David
> >
> >
> >     On 16/04/2019 18:34, Oliver Terbu wrote:
> >     > Yes, I was part of the expert group (ISO/IEC JTC1 WG10) working on
> >     the spec. I also created awareness that W3C VCs are a good idea, but
> >     it was not adopted.
> >     >
> >     > Last time I spoke to them, ISO 18013-5 will allow two different
> >     approaches:
> >     > - Offline: a smartphone version of the chip card and data is
> >     transmitted between a verifier and a holder using BLE, NFC, etc. The
> >     data format has to be chip-friendly and uses ISO/IEC 18013-2 and
> >     ISO/IEC 18013-3 encoding. I heard they recently looked into CBOR.
> >     > - Online: allows the transmission of a “token” to establish a
> >     connection with an online server and obtain the data from the
> >     server. The data format is based on JWT. The exchange protocol they
> >     were looking into was OpenID Connect. In theory, the “token” could
> >     also be a DID, but the exchange format would need to be extended
> >     respectively ISO 18013-5 amended.
> >     >
> >     > Their primary intention is not to introduce an online identity.
> >     Their primary focus is peer-to-peer verification, e.g., roadside
> stop.
> >     >
> >     > The group also looked into different types of ZKPs. Data
> >     minimization was a declared goal of the working group, i.e., atomic
> >     claims, and will be part of the spec.
> >     >
> >     > We could always try to set up a call with them when they are
> >     convening (usually every two months).
> >     >
> >     > Oliver
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >> On 16. Apr 2019, at 19:25, David Chadwick
> >     <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk <mailto:D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>> wrote:
> >     >>
> >     >> Thanks Mike
> >     >>
> >     >> the other thing I mentioned to the UK DVLA was the notion of
> >     atomic VCs.
> >     >> He had not heard of this concept before, but thought it was a
> >     good idea
> >     >> if each driving license attribute was inserted in a separate VC
> >     so that
> >     >> users could selectively disclose them. (I also shared ZKP VCs
> >     with him
> >     >> as a more advanced alternative of this).
> >     >>
> >     >> If we could get the ISO standard to acknowledge this concept as
> well
> >     >> (assuming it does not already do this), then it would be a big
> >     win for
> >     >> privacy.
> >     >>
> >     >> kind regards
> >     >>
> >     >> David
> >     >>
> >     >> On 16/04/2019 18:02, Mike Varley wrote:
> >     >>> I am not an expert on the ISO spec, but an earlier version I saw
> >     was a set of claims (like a JSON doc) that could be wrapped in
> >     another attestation format - like a VC or JWS or both.
> >     >>> I will try and follow up to see if that is still true.
> >     >>>
> >     >>> MV
> >     >>>
> >     >>> On 2019-04-16, 12:59 PM, "David Chadwick"
> >     <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk <mailto:D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>> wrote:
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    Hi All
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    I spoke with the UK Driving License Authority today and it
> >     appears that
> >     >>>    an ISO standard for electronic driving licenses is nearly
> >     completed. It is
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    ISO 18013 part 5
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    It is out for ballot at the moment I believe.
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    Even though I am a member of BSI I cannot get a copy without
> >     being a
> >     >>>    member of the working group (which I am not). But I
> >     understand that the
> >     >>>    draft standard does not mention W3C Verifiable Credentials
> >     nor propose
> >     >>>    to use our technology for electronic driving licenses. This
> >     would be a
> >     >>>    huge missed opportunity if governments all around the world
> >     (including
> >     >>>    the US, as I understand Virginia has piloted a system
> >     already) start to
> >     >>>    issue electronic driving licenses that are not VC compatible..
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    Is anyone in our group a member of an ISO member body and
> >     could either
> >     >>>    get a look at the standard, or even better, suggest that W3C
> >     VCs are one
> >     >>>    of the mechanisms to be used for publishing electronic
> >     driving licenses
> >     >>>    to users
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    Kind regards
> >     >>>
> >     >>>    David
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>>
> >     >>
> >     >
> >     >
> >
>
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2019 17:58:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 23 April 2019 17:58:25 UTC