- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:00:49 -0500
- To: Lucas Tétreault <lucas@vivvo.com>, Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>, "daniel.hardman@evernym.com" <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>, "kim@learningmachine.com" <kim@learningmachine.com>
- Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 12/11/18 8:43 AM, Lucas Tétreault wrote: > What I'm stuck on right now is keys that have been breached vs. keys > that were rotated for some other reason? We are exploring the possibility of annotating the reason for the key rotation (expiration, revocation due to loss, etc.) > If a key was breached then presumably any and all credentials that > were signed with it should be revoked. Thoughts? If you can note when the key was breached in the DID Document (or elsewhere) when you revoke it, then you don't need to revoke all credentials that were signed with it. Also note that many high-stakes issuers are most likely going to use HSMs, so if there is a breach, they will only revoke credentials during when they thought their system was vulnerable due to the private keys being difficult/impossible to exfiltrate from their hardware-secured storage. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2018 15:01:17 UTC