W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > February 2022

Re: CBOR-LD for VC

From: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 10:47:24 -0800
Message-ID: <CACrqygALmB1Ea=Aj-5y1yTrb30r5LEL-MLG8zFUuu7XQCYHm7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joel Thorstensson <oed@3box.io>
Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 2:18 AM Joel Thorstensson <oed@3box.io> wrote:

> Would be interesting to explore what the intersection of CBOR-LD, VCs, and
> IPLD would be. IPLD is a dataformat for hash linked data. It specifies a
> DAG-CBOR encoding which uses tag 42 to represent a hash link (which imo is
> pretty much the only way you can responsibly do linked data).

We decided not using the old version of CBOR-LD as it was a mishmash of
JSON-LD & IPLD, plus a little CBOR. Could be a newer version is better, but
we are very uncomfortable in supporting IPLD in the mashup.

We don’t have a replacement but are investigating a number of more CBOR
centric approaches, COSE, CSF (
https://test.webpki.org/csf-lab/home), or maybe one of our own tentatively
called crypto-envelope that supports both signatures & encryption, and
allows for partial signatures, multisig, transcryption, smart signatures
predicates, etc.

We also have some cryptographic objects defined in CBOR that this group
might find useful at
starting at 300.

These are largely for airgap QR wallet oriented scenarios: request a seed,
Shamir shard a seed, derive an hd-key, key, or address, join in a multisig
account and sign your part of one (though the later two are Bitcoin-centric
now they are designed to be adaptable in future), and animated QR for
larger transfers.

— Christopher Allen

Received on Monday, 14 February 2022 18:47:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:25:28 UTC