David Chadwick wrote: > Regardless of what you call them (deny, black, block) they are still > flawed and should not be relied upon as they are usually trivial to bypass. An ability to "bypass" a black-list is only relevant in an application which relies on such lists being complete. However, even incomplete lists can provide value in many contexts. For instance, some authority might construct a list of "members of the press." However, I might wish to comment on that list by saying that I consider some of them to be more advocates clothed in the trappings of the press rather than being actual press. In this case, I might build a list whose members are those whose "pressness" I think should be denied, even if they have credentials issued by some otherwise accepted authority. As long as I don't declare that my blacklist is complete, some folk might find the list to be useful. Others might ignore it. So be it. In general, I think there should be a well-known mechanism for commenting on claims that are made or implied by some other issuers' VCs. A "blacklist" is one way to do so. Mechanisms with greater expressive richness would be appreciated as well. How can or should I comment on a VC issued by someone else? What mechanisms are provided to do so? bob wyman
Received on Thursday, 12 August 2021 20:08:54 UTC