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

Non-correlation / pseudo-anonymity (was Re: VOTE: Verifiable Claims Terminology)

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 12:46:25 -0400
To: public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <575C4061.5020704@digitalbazaar.com>
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

I'm not arguing against non-correlation. It's an important requirement.
Correlatability is an important requirement as well.

Proof of age should be non-correlatable.

Passport is correlatable.

Email is correlatable (and how many systems that you use on a regular
basis have your email address?)

I'm strongly asserting that anyone claiming that they have a solution
that actually provides non-correlatability in non-trivial use cases has
either not thought deeply about the problem or is selling snake oil.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
JSON-LD Best Practice: Context Caching
Received on Saturday, 11 June 2016 16:46:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:53 UTC