Re: Inventory of Government related DID/VC projects

+1 to exactly what Kevin is recommending for legally approved acceptance
of verifiable credentials for KYC/AML. This could be further enhanced by
having the acceptable credentials (or claims) be specified by governance
After all, who better to specify a governance framework than...a government

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 4:13 PM Kevin O'Brien <> wrote:

> Here's ours:
> "Kiva, Sierra Leone and U.N. agencies announced the first implementation
> of the Kiva Protocol on Sept. 27, 2018, at the U.N. General Assembly. The
> Kiva Protocol will be used to create a nationwide digital identification
> system designed to help the country’s 7 million citizens access the
> financial services they need to improve their lives.
> Globally, 1.7 billion adults are unbanked, including 80% of the citizens
> of Sierra Leone. Two of the major barriers to accessing financial services
> are a lack of formal identification and a lack of verifiable credit history.
> The new Kiva Protocol is designed to address these barriers by using
> distributed ledger technology to issue digital identification to all
> citizens. Through the Kiva Protocol, both formal and informal financial
> institutions (from banks to shopkeepers giving credit) can help contribute
> to a person’s credit history."
> For picture, you could credit and use the photo here of President Bio
> announcing it:
> or could just use our logo.
> As for thoughts on privacy and legislation, especially around KYC/AML, one
> thing I bring up a lot is a hope that eventually laws and regulations will
> support financial institutions only needing to verify that the individual
> can present a KYC/AML credential, but not have to actually show any of the
> PII. Thus, I could go to any accredited KYC/AML verification provider I
> choose, present them with the PII they need to verify, then receive a
> verifiable credential indicating the check has been done/passed and meets a
> certain standard. This credential would be presented to a bank when
> applying with them. This would actually make things more efficient for
> banks, but banks are often conservative and I believe would really need
> legislation or governmental guidance pushing them in this direction to get
> there.
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 3:37 PM Christopher Allen <
>> wrote:
>> I've been asked to run a session in Wyoming during the next legislative
>> Blockchain Task Force on May 6th & 7th on the topic of possible new state
>> laws & regulations around identity and privacy. As Wyoming has passed 13
>> different laws related to cryptographic technologies and blockchain in the
>> last two years, there is a real opportunity to help set the legislative
>> agenda not only for the Wyoming but also the United States and the rest of
>> the world.
>> I need two things:
>>    - A list of government supported decentralized identity projects
>>    sponsored by or intended for governments. I have a list of some Sovrin and
>>    Veres One projects, but am missing quite a few from other companies. In
>>    particular, there are a lot of companies doing KYC/AML pilots with
>>    governments that I don't have details on. Seeking a short
>>    sentence/paragraph of the project, and a picture and link I can put on a
>>    slide for each.
>>    - Any thoughts on what regulatory guidance or laws might be
>>    appropriate for a libertarian privacy-oriented state government?
>>       - What do people think of Illinois biometric laws, can Wyoming do
>>       better?
>>       - How do we limit AML regs from requiring money transmitter
>>       licenses from most every consumer Lightning Node, Proof-of-Stake holder, or
>>       small-time cryptocurrency miner, and thus forcing them to AML register all
>>       transfers and thus violating privacy of users?
>>       - How to we prevent court requests for seizure of keys and instead
>>       only demand transfer of digital assets, as keys protect both personal
>>       information and digital assets.
>>       - How do we persuade them to consider that personal data doesn't
>>       easily fall into simple definitions of property, and to be careful about
>>       regulating PII as property, aka #RightsNotProperty?
>>       - Other identity/privacy oriented thoughts?
>> Thanks!
>> -- Christopher

Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2019 00:55:58 UTC