Re: Utah State-Endorsed Digital Identity (SEDI) legislation

Or maybe not show a Service Provider… but any other individual depending on
a legally binding signature from another individual.

Here is the deal !!minimium viable disclosure!!

It doesn’t have to be Gov Id in itself, Gov Ids just have certain trust
bound to them right now, disclosing them is a taboo.

Okay let’s have give an ability for an individual to ask a similar power to
be delegated for a value the individual controls.

😱🫠😡


la 14.2.2026 klo 1.42 ap. Jori Lehtinen <lehtinenjori03@gmail.com>
kirjoitti:

>
> There is no way they can restrict that.
>
> They can just choose to not disclose plain gov Id to anyone and not give
> any individual the capability disclose that and thats fine.
>
> But you are also missing the point.
>
> There does not have to be any use of goverment IDs in online service.
>
> Goverment approved TSPs can still issue selective disclosure claims about
> individuals based on the govId they control.
>
> And if the best type of TSPs are the types that generate these claims from
> a physical Id and they are left in the individuals control.
>
> None of this no matter how you change it or what you do changes the fact
> that a individual could still disclose their gov Id anyway.
>
> But if you are concerned about a social security number being shared for
> example. That doesn’t really have to happend. Social Security Number is not
> relevant outside goverment systems. And  goverment systems shouldn’t
> consider presenting it as a trust signal anyway, and they don’t.
>
> What matter for the free market competition in my opinion that it is not
> too hard for me to direct an user to get a VC that the law recognises that
> could be used for digitally signing contracts for example.
>
> The (Q)TSP is ridiculous there at least it should not cost anything.
>
> Why cannot a individual ask a goverment to associate legal power to a DID
> they control.
>
> And then in a dispute a contract singed with the DIDs private key
> represents the individual.
>
> Note that the Gov could verify the individual however they want and just
> issue a VC that shows a service provider that okay some DID has a required
> capability to sign contracts.
>
> MAIN POINT: Ability to provide x service should not be gatekept
> byrocratically when there is no real reason to.
>
> MAIN SOLUTION: Legislation should allow individuals to ask goverments to
> give powers to some values they control upon proper assurance the
> individual is who they say they are that the goverment considers nessecary.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> la 14.2.2026 klo 1.12 ap. NIKOLAOS FOTIOY <fotiou@aueb.gr> kirjoitti:
>
>> Hi Filip,
>> EUDI restrictions apply to government IDs and not to digital credentials
>> in general. In my opinion the more restrictions there  are on the use of
>> government IDs in online services the better for individuals. I
>> respectfully disagree with your statement “Many private actors request ID
>> routinely”, at least in Europe this is not the case. Few private actors
>> request your  ID and even fewer make a record of your ID.
>>
>>  Best,
>> Nikos
>>
>> 14 Φεβ 2026, 12:28 πμ, ο χρήστης «Filip Kolarik <filip26@gmail.com>»
>> έγραψε:
>>
>> 
>>
>> Hi Nikos,
>>
>> With physical documents, governments have no control over who asks to see
>> a government-issued ID, and simply asking isn’t illegal. Many private
>> actors request ID routinely; not because there’s some explicit legal
>> support granting them special status.
>>
>> The real issue isn’t who asks, it’s misuse. That’s a separate topic
>> entirely, and restricting wallets and verification through controlled or
>> approved apps doesn’t address it. If anything, it locks the ecosystem,
>> limits beneficial use, and risks negatively impacting innovation and
>> economic growth while favoring large incumbents.
>>
>> Wallet or verifier restrictions do not solve the problem; they just
>> introduce new ones and risk preventing the EU from being competitive once
>> again. It could end up being another case of billions spent on a project
>> that fails to deliver, again.
>>
>> Best,
>> Filip
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/filipkolarik/
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 11:10 PM NIKOLAOS FOTIOY <fotiou@aueb.gr> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > No, that's government overreach into the private lives of individuals.
>>> > I should be able to show my government ID to anyone I choose to show
>>> > it to. It also works against the government because your credentials
>>> > become less valuable as less people can rely on them. How do you get
>>> > onto the verifier list? These are policy decisions that often get
>>> > gamed by large organizations.
>>>
>>> This is our fundamental difference in thinking. In my opinion
>>> individuals do not feel restricted for not be able to show their government
>>> ID, it’s the other way around: they do not want to show their government
>>> ID. In the real world there are restrictions who can ask your government
>>> ID. In my opinion it should be the same in the digital world.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Nikos
>>
>>