Re: Materials from 2019-04-11 combined DID Spec and DID Resolution Spec meeting

I’m a bit confused.
- Is the DID method always tied to a wallet or other holder agent in any
particular way? If not then do verifiers get to consider both separately?
- I can understand a verifier refusing to accept a DID method they consider
insecure no matter the issuer but, can an issuer refuse to use my DID
because they don’t like my method or my wallet?


On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 1:14 PM Avesta Hojjati <>

> It is important to understand that the platform is decentralized,
> therefore it enables other components (DIDs, Keys, etc) to be decentralized
> as well. If we are specially discussing about the private keys, then the
> terminology will differ, for example are we talking about MPC when it comes
> to decentralized private keys or multiple copies of the same private key
> being distributed.
> Im sure Drummond has some content in regards to this in the trust
> framework.
> -Avesta
> *From: *Christopher Allen <>
> *Date: *Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 12:08 PM
> *To: *=Drummond Reed <>
> *Cc: *Adrian Gropper <>, Avesta Hojjati <
>>, Credentials Community Group <
>>, David Chadwick <>,
> Luca Boldrin <>
> *Subject: *Re: Materials from 2019-04-11 combined DID Spec and DID
> Resolution Spec meeting
> I wonder if in trying to define requirements for what is or isn’t
> decentralized, that maybe we are missing the most important thing:
> decentralized keys. If “proper” DIDs were restricted in some way to only
> support those systems where the keys are self-administrative with full
> CRUD. In some ways, the rest of the “decentralized” items can be wishlist,
> but necessary a requirement.
> — Christopher Allen [via iPhone]

Adrian Gropper MD

HELP us fight for the right to control personal health data.

Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2019 00:36:29 UTC