W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > December 2020

Re: Verifiable Requests?

From: Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 12:57:27 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFBYrUqHHv6mbsgNUzfk+3eOJSGsjMQnmVFMKvJROPa1ket11Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Buchner <danieljb2@gmail.com>
Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
I apologize.

When you and I and your team spoke at length earlier this year, I remember
some discussions about how to achieve selective disclosure by returning to
the issuer. Apparently I either remembered incorrectly or read too much
into them. My intent was to accurately summarize what I understood, not to
mischaracterize your thinking. I have lamented being misrepresented, so I
know that can be frustrating. I'm sorry.


On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:44 AM Daniel Buchner <danieljb2@gmail.com> wrote:

> "MS has proposed to do it [limiting disclosure] by going back to the
> Issuer" - I just want to point out that we are *not* proposing calling back
> to Issuers as the solution for limited disclosure. As we've researched and
> written about in depth (
> https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/identity-standards-blog/advancing-privacy-with-zero-knowledge-proof-credentials/ba-p/1441554)
> we are gearing up to do this via ZKPs. I'd request that folks please try
> not to state the positions of other entities without high confidence in
> what that entity's positions are.
Received on Sunday, 20 December 2020 19:57:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 20 December 2020 19:57:54 UTC