RE: Authorized Issuer Lists

>… and the volume of usage of those issues credentials by verifiers can be tracked so that people can infer how trusted it is by the volume and diversity of who is using those verifiers
> … Do any of the specifications support this kind of governance? I’d be curious to hear peoples thoughts on this.

Curious about this as well.

I would like to understand approaches to track “ … the volume of usage of those issues credentials by verifiers can be tracked so that people can infer …“ in such a manner that is resistant to gaming that metric, since it could end up becoming a situation very similar to how folks try to game Google’s PageRank algorithm.

Best Regards,

Anil


From: Leah Houston, MD <leah@hpec.io>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2022 7:40 AM
To: Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com>
Cc: Kyano Kashi <kyanokashi2@gmail.com>; Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>; Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>; Tobias Looker <tobias.looker@mattr.global>; W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Authorized Issuer Lists

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of DHS. DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your component SOC with questions or concerns.

I think in order to avoid a dystopian situation there needs to be a way to self register on these lists… Anyone should be able to register as an issuer, and the volume of usage of those issues credentials by verifiers can be tracked so that people can infer how trusted it is by the volume and diversity of who is using those verifiers.

For the medical industry I give the example of ABMS - The American Board of medical specialties vs NBPAS - The the national board of physicians and surgeons.

ABMS Was trusted for many many years, and only recently over the last 5 or 10 years has come under extreme scrutiny because they started moving the goal post on Practicing physicians and raising the cost and effort needed to stay accredited. (They have actually been brought up on charges for of racketeering)

NBPAS - has recently started to be accepted by the physician community and hospitals alike. Insurance companies will soon start to recognize it as as well.

In this example the instant that A new accreding body like NBPAS becomes available the founders of the accrediting body could add that body to the list. Initially it would go un-utilized, however as verifying bodies start accepting the new credentials the usage can be automatically tracked and registered under that particular accrediting body. As time went on and usage went up but accrediting body will gain more notoriety based on its actual usage.

I feel a governance structure like this is absolutely necessary because at minimum it gives a mechanism for the people to regulate the regulators.

Do any of the specifications support this kind of governance? I’d be curious to hear peoples thoughts on this.


--
Leah Houston M.D.
President and Founding Partner
www.hpec.io<https://urldefense.us/v3/__http:/www.hpec.io__;!!BClRuOV5cvtbuNI!QLgr-9v0mEJ0bGW0SLDNYF_8dYw-BYV4teeTJkQSpL9kk1vSkctKrZpyXc4B6oEJ6MP1$>
Humanitarian Physicians Empowerment Community
Humanitarian Physicians Empowerment Coin