Re: Hello world, meet American driver’s licenses

Hi Adrian,

What you say is absolutely true: some explicit identification/authentication checks are more privacy-respecting than others, and much of what we do online and offline is leaving digital footprints that we don’t see, and can’t manage. That said, I think the whole data brokerage/data monetization engine is a very good example of why, when we design MDL-like solutions for attribute assertion, we should be doing so in a way that would provide minimum input to that engine.

If we’re designing something that contains all the same kinds of attribute as a plastic driver’s licence, we should be designing it in a way that makes selective, privacy-respecting disclosure the default. *Only the attribute required in the context at hand*, and only as much information about that attribute as is needed. For instance…

- when I pay for something with a credit card, the seller doesn’t see how much money I’ve got in my account; what they’re really getting is an assertion that “This cardholder is creditworthy to the tune of amount x”;

- if we assume that the MDL-like thing enables the individual to make a trustworthy assertion, I think everyone on this list understands the differing privacy levels of responding to “are you of legal age to buy alcohol in this jurisdiction” with one of the following:

- “Yes”
- “I was born before 2004”
- “I am 45 years old"
- “My date of birth is 25/6/1980”
and - “here’s my plastic driver’s licence, including my photo, address, name, signature, and classes of vehicle I’m entitled to drive”

We shouldn’t be settling for age verification techniques that perpetuate privacy-hostile ways of doing things. As a current example, online “adult” sites are apparently responding to the UK’s new age verification laws by using things like credit card data and facial biometrics as proxies for proof of age. I think our work should be putting forward better solutions than that - and let’s face it, that’s a low bar ;^,

Best wishes,
Robin

Robin Wilton, Senior Director - Internet Trust
wilton@isoc.org

[image001.png]
internetsociety.org | @internetsociety



On 27 Jun 2025, at 01:28, Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com> wrote:

Kim's article is certainly important but the focus on mDL surveillance misses the elephant in the digital privacy room. Most of the examples she gives, other than age verification, already leave a record that can be used for near-universal surveillance. Every credit card transaction calls home and keeps a record. Signing-in to a hotel leaves a ledger. So does signing with a notary. Picking up a package. Etc... Will mDL make a qualitative difference?

I appreciate the efforts of this community and of organizations like EPIC (that I work with) to push back on digital surveillance through mDL but I suggest to you that ignoring the realities of using digital payments, contracts and commerce, in an environment where Palantir and DOGE are enlisting both private and public data brokerage in opaque ways suggests to me that mDL's most important feature will be educating the society on what digital platforms are already doing to us.

Adrian

On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 3:14 PM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com<mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 12:23 PM Kalin NICOLOV <kalin.nicolov@gmail.com<mailto:kalin.nicolov@gmail.com>> wrote:
> True, Steve, Chris and Timothy are all involved in the best way possible - why is this not happening more often in other states though?

Having engaged with other states on these topics, one of the reasons
it's not happening there is because they don't have access to people
like Steve, Chris, and Timothy at the legislative level. Many of these
legislators also have "bigger" problems that they're dealing with
(political unrest, healthcare crises, budget crises, etc.).

There is a huge knowledge gap in state legislatures and even in their
state information technology divisions when it comes to good policy
wrt. digital credentials. As many of the folks on this mailing list
that are engaged with these governments, large and small, are aware...
we spend a lot of our time educating these policy makers and agencies
on how to responsibly deploy these technologies.

To further complicate matters, some vendors have higher tolerances for
privacy and security risks than other vendors... some vendors disagree
with what is and is not acceptable... and sometimes, the budget (or
political appetite) just isn't there to do a more thorough job.

Largely, this is an education challenge; I think we underestimate just
how much specialized knowledge we have in communities like these and
how long it takes for that knowledge to filter out into the minds of
decision makers. It can take decades, especially when you have
disagreements over things like whether or not server retrieval is a
feature worth keeping.

... which is why articles like the one Kim wrote are so important.
They educate beyond this community and that is desperately needed to
scale digital credential technology to the masses.

-- manu

--
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/

Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/