- From: Adam Stallard <adam.stallard@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 10:09:17 -0700
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: Wayne Chang <wyc@fastmail.fm>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPKR6aoE_tNY=-8npPVtSP=NN9AKNWCaDqN+ygZH=3ooU+FL5A@mail.gmail.com>
Verifiable credentials can certainly help. At BrightID, we're working on way for a decentralized group of computer nodes that analyze an anonymous social graph and make determinations about uniqueness to collaborate to sign a credential for a user. These credentials also have a notion of "context" to avoid unwanted linkage between a user as they participate in various apps and networks. A user of app A should be able to prove they're using only one account there without linking that account to an account in app B. On Wed, Sep 9, 2020, 3:55 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > I think this was the important insight of the paper here. And I wonder if > it can be solved with verifiable credentials? > > "If blockchains are to become a significant public infrastructure, > particularly in the space of civic engagement, then Proof of Work's > “one-CPU-one-vote” or Proof of Stake's “one-dollar-one-vote” systems will > not suffice: in order to enable democratic governance, protocols that > signal unique human identities to enable "one-person-one-vote" systems must > be created." > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 12:50, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> PDF is here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.05300.pdf >> >> Keywords: decentralized identity, Sybil-protection, crypto-governance >> >> Abstract. >> >> Most self-sovereign identity systems consist of strictly objective >> claims, cryptographically signed by trusted third party attestors. Lacking >> protocols in place to account for subjectivity, these systems do not form >> new sources of legitimacy that can address the central question concerning >> identity authentication: "Who verifies the verifier?". Instead, the >> legitimacy of claims is derived from traditional centralized institutions >> such as national ID issuers and KYC providers. Thisarchitecture has been >> employed, in part, to safeguard protocols from a vulnerability previously >> thought to be impossible to address in peer-to-peer systems: the Sybil >> attack, which refers to the abuse of an online system by creating many >> illegitimate virtual personas. Inspired by the progress in cryptocurrencies >> and blockchain technology, there has recently been a surge in networked >> protocols that make use of subjective inputs such as voting, vouching,and >> interpreting, to arrive at a decentralized and sybil-resistant consensus >> for identity. In this review, we will outline the approaches of these new >> and natively digital sources of authentication - their attributes, >> methodologies strengths, and weaknesses - and sketch out possible >> directions for future developments. >> >> On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 03:21, Wayne Chang <wyc@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> >>> link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.05300 >>> >>> discussion from strangers on the internet: >>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24411076 >>> >>>
Received on Thursday, 10 September 2020 05:57:22 UTC