Re: In case of accidents

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 23:20, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/23/20 5:15 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote:
> > If so, depending on the prevailing personal
> > information identifier systems and regulation within the nation, the
> > best option would be biometrics. However, access to and scope of use
> > of biometrics would be restricted to specific agencies.
>
> Hi Sankarshan and Sethi,
>
> There are a number of organizations that have been exploring the use of
> "Guardians" and "Delegates" in events such as these. Most of the
> solutions boil down to "use a capability/key that can only be used when
> a proof that you are in trouble is provided by an authoritative source,
> such a as hospital". That capability key would allow the hospital to
> retrieve a subset of the information in your digital wallet, like "all
> medical records".
>

Thank you for the clarification. I was interested in understanding the
extent of the "unavailability of other means" scenario being thought
in context of the original email.  There is always the
all-bets-are-off case. But prior to that spectrum, as you and Daniel
(mentions later) there is quite a bit of ongoing work which I am
getting myself to speed with.

> It is also possible to have a "protected biometrics mapping to access
> capability/key" service that you opt into that is, again, only
> accessible by healthcare workers in an emergency without leaking which
> DID the information is associated with and in some cases, without
> leaking anything more than things that need to be known like which
> medications you're on, your basic health profile, possibly an emergency
> contact via encrypted communication -- no personal names, emails,
> personal numbers, etc. ... but all that is probably more than a decade
> or more off into the future.

Received on Friday, 24 January 2020 03:56:18 UTC