Re: Moving BBS+ signature scheme specification for JSON-LD Signatures into CCG

Big Big +1

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:48 AM Oliver Terbu <oliver.terbu@consensys.net>
wrote:

> +1 also supportive and big kudos to Mattr.
>
> Oliver
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:13 PM Mike Varley <mike.varley@securekey.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 from SecureKey.
>> Having a specification of this proof mechanism that can drive the
>> development of test suites for interoperability has lead to successful*
>> interop results in the SVIP project. Other aspects of the specification
>> seems like a bonus :)
>>
>> (*) - granted these specs for SVIP were 'rushed' and require more
>> community input, and the "building the bridge while trying to cross it" was
>> very stressful, the spec => test suite => interop pattern has gleaned
>> positive interoperability results.
>>
>> MV
>>
>> On 2020-05-01, 11:45 AM, "Jordan, John CITZ:EX" <John.Jordan@gov.bc.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Likewise, the Province of BC is very keen to be a part of putting
>> these innovations into action.
>>
>>     We would like some help to understand what it is we can do to be most
>> helpful in this regard.
>>
>>     Best  (and recovering from the intensity IIW!)
>>     John
>>
>>
>>     From: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
>>     Date: Friday, May 1, 2020 at 8:40 AM
>>     To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
>>     Cc: "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
>>     Subject: Re: Moving BBS+ signature scheme specification for JSON-LD
>> Signatures into CCG
>>     Resent-From: <public-credentials@w3.org>
>>     Resent-Date: Friday, May 1, 2020 at 8:40 AM
>>
>>     Obviously supportive of this, let's get it adopted as a work item. We
>> have done our best to get the spec in order, but there are still some
>> issues open which could impact the suite representation significantly...
>> But overall, the was my favorite thing from IIW, and I'm very eager to
>> support both the code and the spec!
>>
>>     On Fri, May 1, 2020, 10:32 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com
>> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote:
>>     On 4/30/20 9:02 PM, Kyle Den Hartog wrote:
>>     > As many of you know from IIW, Mattr has been working on a method to
>>     > achieve selective disclosure with ZKPs in a way that works with
>> JSON-LD
>>     > signatures and plugs directly into vc-js. With that, we've written a
>>     > specification on how this JSON-LD signatures scheme would work and
>> would
>>     > like to move it into the CCG as a work item to go with the
>> LD-proofs work.
>>
>>     Digital Bazaar is deeply supportive of this work because:
>>
>>     * It enables a "dip your toes in the water" approach to ZKPs
>>       and how they are used in the Verifiable Credentials
>>       ecosystem.
>>
>>     * It is agnostic to the signature packaging format (JOSE vs.
>>       LD Proofs), enabling the entire ecosystem to use it.
>>
>>     * It does not require a DLT, and is thus ledger-agnostic.
>>
>>     * It separates selective-disclosure and link secrets, the
>>       former being useful for a wider variety of use cases than the
>>       latter.
>>
>>     * It is possible to make it a drop-in technological replacement
>>       for existing signature schemes, such as
>>       Ed25519SignatureSuite2018.
>>
>>     There were a number of concerns raised by Nathan George during the IIW
>>     presentation that we feel need to be explored to ensure that we have
>> all
>>     of the security corner cases covered.
>>
>>     We applaud Mattr (Kyle, Tobias, Mike L., and supporting organizations)
>>     for their work in this space. Very excited to see this work move
>> forward.
>>
>>     -- manu
>>
>>     --
>>     Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
>>     Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>     blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
>>     https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
>>
>> This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended
>> recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from
>> disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone
>> other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended
>> recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete
>> this email and its attachments.
>>
>