- From: David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 15:46:52 +0100
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
Hi Bohdan On 11/07/2018 15:59, Bohdan Andriyiv wrote: >> VC's contain a "Terms of Use" field... >> ...Issuer and Holder ... can attach Terms of Use to the data and > digitally sign it such that their intent in sharing the [PII] data > is clear. > > At risk of stating the obvious, but to be clear - a "Terms of Use" field > does not solve the risks of improper PII usage by unreliable parties. > A "Terms of Use" field lessen the ability to use VC that contains PII, > but PII itself remains unprotected. > > To solve the issue of "sensitive PII in the hands of unreliable > holder", This is an extreme edge case. Firstly it is expected that the majority of holders will be the subjects themselves, and they obviously trust themselves. There is then a PR on subject NE holder to address these less common cases. Your example is a subset of these. We could add text to this PR to address this edge case if you want. Please add a comment to the PR if you would like me to do this. My initial response to your issue is 'the subject should not delegate to an unreliable holder, and the issuer should not issue to an unreliable holder' so this deals with the majority of the edge cases. Do you have a real use case where it is essential for a subject or issuer to give a VC to an unreliable holder (who also must not be the verifier, because I believe Terms of Use deals with Verifiers) > we will have to use the mix of - unlostable DIDs, e2ee, and > hubs of encrypted PII guarded by trusted intermediaries. See the logic > described in my previous email - > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2018Jul/0024.html. > > Do you think this solution is too complex, unlikely? or you think a > "Terms of Use" field alone, will be enough in practise? I think your solution is complex and is for extreme edge cases only, so could be omitted from v1 of the data model. Regards David > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com > <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 12:53 AM, Carlos Bruguera wrote: > > One thing that's not clear to me yet, though, is how can DIDs/VCs > > actually avoid the risks of improper personal information management > > once credentials and personal data have been shared with a relying > > party... Any opinions shared by the community on this regard? > > VC's contain a "Terms of Use" field: > > https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#terms-of-use > <https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#terms-of-use> > > While the contents of that field are still under discussion, the idea is > that both the Issuer[1] of the Verifiable Credential and the Holder[2], > who creates Verifiable Presentations[3], can attach Terms of Use to the > data and digitally sign it such that their intent in sharing the data is > clear. > > This enables issuers to say things like: "This credential can only be > used to prove citizenship." > > It also enables holders (us) to say things like: "I only authorize the > use of this credential to establish an account with your service, you > are not authorized to store, cache, or share the credential." > > ... but in a machine-readable way that makes processing and compliance > with those statements automatic. > > -- manu > > [1] https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#dfn-issuers > <https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#dfn-issuers> > [2] https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#dfn-holders > <https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#dfn-holders> > [3] https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#presentations > <https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#presentations> > > -- > 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 > <https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches> > >
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2018 14:47:21 UTC