- From: Moses Ma <moses.ma@futurelabconsulting.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 10:04:27 -0700
- To: Chris Boscolo <chris@boscolo.net>, John CITZ:EX Jordan <john.jordan@gov.bc.ca>
- Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Message-ID: <60ac3330-325f-48e6-9a07-a033b2804895@Moses-iPad-Air-2-6>
+1 for gov issued VCs, especially for people with dual citizenship
-
This is interesting, how the USPS verifies identity for passport issuance:
Primary Proof of Identity
In-state, valid driver's license (not temporary or learner's permit)
Fully-valid, undamaged U.S. passport book or passport card (with recognizable photo, can be expired)
Certificate of Naturalization (with recognizable photo)
Certificate of Citizenship (with recognizable photo)
Government employee ID (city, county, state, or federal)
U.S. military or military dependent ID
Current (valid) foreign passport
Matricula Consular (Mexican Consular ID) - commonly used by a parent of a U.S. citizen child applicant
Permanent resident card (Green Card) - commonly used by a parent of a U.S. citizen child applicant
If you apply at a Passport Application Acceptance Facility and submit an out-of-state primary identification, you also have to present an additional ID document. For example, if you apply in Arizona with a Texas Driver's License, you must present an additional ID.
Secondary Proof of Identity
Social Security Cards serves as seconday proof of identification.
State-issued non-driver ID
Out-of-state driver's license
Social Security card
Learner's or temporary driver's permit
Voter registration card
Employee ID
Student ID
Selective Service (draft) card
Medicare or other health card
Expired driver's license
Membership card in a local social organization or club
Rental contracts
Mortgage documents
Auto registrations
Traffic tickets & violations
An Identifying Witness (someone who can swear to your identity) that is present at the time of your application. He or she must:
Have known you for at least 2 years
Be a U.S. citizen or permanent resident
Have valid ID
Fill out Form DS-71: Affidavit of Identifying Witness in the presence of a Passport Agent
-
Moses Ma | NextGEN Ventures Inc
moses@ngenven.com | moses.ma@futurelabconsulting.com
v +1.415.952.7888 (tel:+1.415.952.7888) | m +1.415.568.1068 (tel:+1.415.568.1068) | skype mosesma
>
> On Jun 2, 2018 at 9:48 AM, <Chris Boscolo (mailto:chris@boscolo.net)> wrote:
>
>
>
> Thanks for this contribution, Jordan.
>
>
> I agree with you that GOV-issued VCs are the right way to prove the existence of a legal entity.
>
>
> I have a couple of follow-up questions/comments.
>
>
>
> 1) Since the issuer of a VC is also identified via a DID, how is this GOV DID that signs the Org VCs made know to others?
>
>
>
> 2) Not all organizations are legal entities. Some are more informal, like a book club? Who signs these VCs?
>
>
>
> I have some thoughts on these questions but am curious about what others think.
>
>
>
> -chrisb
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Jordan, John CITZ:EX <John.Jordan@gov.bc.ca (mailto:John.Jordan@gov.bc.ca)> wrote:
>
> > So ...
> >
> > I think I have a different point of view on corporate identifiers ... I don’t think we need a single identifier like we have been trying to unsuccessfully have in some places for years. I feel like those numbers are a bad side effect of centralized database primary keys.
> >
> > For sure a legal entity that isn't human (corporations, partnerships, societies, etc) will have DIDs, however I don't think they need one DID to be known by. These types of entities have to be created by some legislatively authorized authority. They only exist as a construct of a law. Therefore, there must be a Verifiable Credential issued to that entity. It is this verifiable credential that is the proof of existence for that legal entity. It may contain some sort of locally unique identifier but that is beside the point I believe. The entity will have presented the authority with a DID to which the verifiable credential would be issued from the point of view of the authority. However, if the legal entity later establishes a digital relationship with a supply chain partner or what not .. they could use a different DID for that relationship and use the verifiable credential they hold to prove they are a registered legal entity (and whatever other proofs they are required to provide) to their new partner.
> >
> > I think the reason I am quite resistant to a single identifier (if that is what is being contemplated) for an organization is that in the real world stuff happens. Organizations, change, merge, are sold and so forth. Very rarely do they go about the task of informing all the connections they have after this real world event has happened and when it impacts things like legal name, the identifier they are known by and whatnot. And so, over time the real world events wander off from these single identifiers no matter who controls those identifiers. What is more dynamic and more closely related to the real world happenings are the verifiable credentials. When a corporation is bought by another there must be an interaction with the Corporate Registrar to deal with credentials. This purchasing corporation may, likely will, create new relationships (DIDs) and perhaps have ways to have the verifiable credentials of the purchased company transferred to them with the proper new legal name etc.
> >
> > Anyway, I think it better to separate the DID (addressing space) from the verifiable credential (business space).
> >
> > My thoughts.
> > J
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2018-06-01, 6:12 AM, "Manu Sporny" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com (mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com)> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/31/2018 07:15 AM, Kettunen Antti J wrote:
> > > Manu, this sounds a really interesting use case. The Corporate
> > > identifiers is a huge topic, since it touches on a vast number of
> > > additional use cases, like representation rights, founding
> > > documents, share ownership, etc.
> >
> > Yes, cryptographic corporate identifiers seem to be a very common use of
> > Decentralized Identifiers. The process seems to be:
> >
> > 1. Organization gets a DID.
> > 2. Government issues a Verifiable Credential for the DID.
> > 3. DID + VC is used to perform some task.
> >
> > > Do you think these use cases should be separate, or should we
> > > collaborate on this?
> >
> > I think they are separate use cases that depend on the same three steps
> > above and I think you should submit your use case as well. We can always
> > combine use cases later, but I think the most interesting thing about
> > your use case is that the DID is used in a different set of industries
> > and for a different set of purposes than the one I mentioned.
> >
> > Part of the purpose of these use cases is to demonstrate to the W3C
> > Membership (400+ organizations) that this technology has broad
> > applications and in order to do that, we need to show its use in a very
> > diverse set of market verticals and business processes as possible.
> >
> > -- 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 Saturday, 2 June 2018 17:05:00 UTC