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

Re: Future-proofing VCs via multiple signatures

From: Eugeniu Rusu <eugeniu@jolocom.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:18:04 +0000
To: Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech>, "Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web)" <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "public-credentials@w3.org" <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FR0P281MB08189770392B0EF661172EB4B2549@FR0P281MB0818.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Hey everyone,

As a quick note - the following Github issue<https://github.com/w3c-ccg/data-integrity-spec/issues/26> might also be relevant to this discussion / topic. It briefly touches on some of the open points / design questions wrgt. Proof Chains, as well as Proof Sets.
Thought I would share it here in case anyone would find it useful.

All the best,
From: Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 10:34 AM
To: Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>; public-credentials@w3.org <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Future-proofing VCs via multiple signatures

Manu, the proof chain example here https://w3c-ccg.github.io/data-integrity-spec/#multiple-proofs leaves me a bit confused.

It talks about the proofChain key in the VC but doesn't go into much detail about it and the example looks the same as the proof set to me.. Could you explain what that key is?


On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 2:39 PM Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net<mailto:mwherman@parallelspace.net>> wrote:
My suggestion has nothing to do with VPs ...no intended connection. There may be similarities but it's not intended.

Also, to apply a "proof on top of another proof", consider using nested verifiable/structured credentials where the subject credential is nested in its entirety as a claim inside the credentialSubject of the outer credential/outer proof.


Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com<mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>>
Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 11:12:43 AM
To: public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org> <public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Future-proofing VCs via multiple signatures

On 1/6/22 1:37 PM, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) wrote:
> Consider adopting the Structured Credential Envelope model

Doing so would conflate VCs with VPs, wouldn't it?

We are talking about a set of signatures on a VC.

A set of signatures on a VP is something else entirely.

-- manu

Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
Received on Friday, 14 January 2022 17:51:27 UTC

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