Re: A comparison of Christopher Allen’s Principles of Identity and Kim Cameron’s Laws of Identity

Hello Dan. Thanks for sharing. I haven't read either of these books, but
your summary provides some interesting perspectives. ICYMI the theory of
privacy as contextual integrity (Helen Nissenbaum, see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contextual_integrity for a summary) offers a
different perspective -- it may address the "relying party" concerns here.

Jon

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:40 AM Dan Kioria <dankioria@gmail.com> wrote:

> Principles of Self-Sovereign Identity vs Laws of Identity.
> Principles of SSI by Christopher Allen
> Laws of Identity by the late Kim Cameron
> Two approaches to digital identity, security, and privacy, 15 years apart..
>
>
> https://dankioria.com/a-comparison-of-christopher-allens-principles-of-identity-and-kim-camerons-laws-of-identity/
>
> In summary, "Principal Authority" and "The Laws of Identity"
>  significantly differ in areas of focus. In “Principal Authority”
> Christopher Allen primarily focuses on legal and legislative frameworks
> behind self-sovereign identity. In “Laws of Identity” Kim Cameron focuses
> on setting the groundwork for ensuring internet users can interact with a
> sense of trust, privacy, and security.
>
> The recommended solutions are not exactly similar, but they are all geared
> toward achieving trustworthy, secure, and privacy-preserving digital
> identity systems. That being said, both papers share several concerns,
> recommendations, and principles.
>
> In hindsight, these are two writers tackling the same problem at different
> times and circumstances. The digital identity world has made significant
> leaps since 2005. The late Kim Cameron foresaw most of the challenges that
> Christopher Allen addresses in his paper. However, Cameron may not have
> seen the depth of the challenges the same way Christopher Allen saw them 15
> years later.
>
> Both Principles of SSI and Laws of Identity are focused on protecting the
> person identified. I feel that most digital identity meta-systems have not
> adequately considered the needs of relying parties. Once the person
> identified is protected, who protects the relying parties? Don’t you want
> to be able to trust the claims and representations made by the other party
> just as much as you want privacy and anonymity for yourself?
>
> And aren’t we all relying parties?
>
> Dan Kioria
>


-- 
Jonathan Foote | Sr. Principal Engineer
fastly.com | @fastly