Re: Unique Personhood Requirement for some DID Use Cases

There's a an Ethereum-based blockchain project called Artis in Austria
that wants to support "Accountable Pseudonyms" based on this paper:
https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/accountable-pseudonyms-socialnets08.pdf

See their FAQ:
https://artis.eco/en/faq

I'll invite them to the CCG call.

Markus

On 06/12/2018 08:29 PM, Christopher Allen wrote:
> A number of DID (Decentralized Indentifier)  use cases being discussed here
> seem to explicitly or implicitly require unique personhood, in particular
> scenarios requiring voting.
>
> Personally I call this “Proof of Unique Natural pPerson in a Context”.
> Given a context (say member of W3C) there is one, and only one, unique
> natural person representing each membership. I believe that it is possible
> to do this in a privacy preserving way using web-of-trust claims that is
> statistically highly accurate (99%+) though not absolutely
> deterministically, which I believe to be sufficient for many voting
> scenarios.
>
> There has also been some research on the topic of unique personhood that
> I’ve been interested in, mostly related my hopes for pseudonymous
> web-of-trust support in the DID BTCR Method & Verifiable Claims.
>
> These ideas are talked about the academic paper  “Proof of Personhood” from
> Bryan Ford’s Group at EPFL in Switzerland.
>
> https://www.zerobyte.io/publications/2017-BKJGGF-pop.pdf
>
> Also pseudonym parties:
> http://ww.bford.info/log/2007/0327-PseudonymParties.pdf
>
> Maybe we should schedule an upcoming W3C Credentials CG
> https://w3c-ccg.github.io meeting on the topic of unique personhood, and
> get Bryan (or someone from his team) to present, along with Bohdan’s
> thoughts on unique identity (SURLHI - Statement of Unique Representation of
> Living Human Individual), and my hopes for BTCR.
>
> I also would love to have something basic that is implementable to test
> using DID BTCR architectures by #RebootingWebOfTrust for week of September
> in 24th in Toronto. Maybe a pseudonym party!
>
> — Christopher Allen
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 10:35 AM Bohdan Andriyiv <
> bohdan.andriyiv@validbook.org> wrote:
>
>> Presumably there is a use case for someone to be able to assert that their
>>> DID represents the same person as an ORCID or ISNI?
>>
>>
>> We do this on Validbook by using Validbook Statement of Ownership.
>> Basically, this is a Verifiable Credential with evidence that you control
>> some digital asset. Where evidence is a satisfaction of some challenge -
>> publish random number on or by using that digital asset.
>> Mainly, these Statements of Ownership are used to prove that DID/SSI
>> controls social networking account or blog, but of course they can be used
>> to assert ownership over ORCID, ISNI also.
>>
>> Bohdan
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Presumably there is a use case for someone to be able to assert that
>>> their DID represents the same person as an ORCID or ISNI?
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> On 12/06/18 18:03, Steven Rowat wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2018-06-12 8:50 AM, Siegman, Tzviya wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I’m seeing a lot of use cases for persistent identifiers for people. In
>>> the STEM world, the ORCID [1] is widely used. Some publishers (like the one
>>> I work for) require authors to have an ORCID. There is an overlapping
>>> system called ISNI [2]. These are real-world scenarios that already have
>>> ecosystems supporting them.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's very interesting, and the Wikipedia page for it shows that it's
>>> widespread and increasing rapidly.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORCID
>>>
>>> But it seems to me that it's happening at a different logical layer than
>>> DID, and that DID will have different capabilities; and so both could be
>>> used together if DID becomes widespread.
>>>
>>> For example, the ORCHID doesn't appear to support pseudonymous use, or
>>> multiple use, or to be safe for web commerce (via public/private keys); or
>>> Self-Sovereign Identity in general; the control of the data is by the
>>> ORCHID organization, which is centralized.
>>>
>>> These are just first impressions; perhaps I'm mistaken. But I don't think
>>> it's solving the same problem DID can potentially solve. ORCHID appears to
>>> be for researchers embedded in institutions who are using publisher
>>> organizations, whereas DID is attempting to be useful -- though admittedly
>>> in a similar way at some points -- for everybody on the internet.
>>>
>>> Steven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tzviya
>>>
>>> [1] https://orcid.org/
>>>
>>> [2] http://www.isni.org/
>>>
>>> *Tzviya Siegman*
>>>
>>> Information Standards Lead
>>>
>>> Wiley
>>>
>>> 201-748-6884
>>>
>>> tsiegman@wiley.com <mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> <tsiegman@wiley.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
>>> information systems for education.
>>> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for
>>> innovation in education technology.
>>>
>>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
>>> number SC569282.
>>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
>>> England number OC399090
>>>

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2018 10:27:46 UTC