Re: Identity and the need for security

On 26 October 2015 at 16:45, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
wrote:

> Last Arie question:
>
> In the case of Identity being critical, would there not be a strong case
> for Security?
>
>    - dynamic keys?
>       - 3FFA?
>
> By this I assume the question is about transactions where the parties must
> be known due to regulations (KYC/AML)?
>
> I wouldn't conflate security and identity. A system like ILP will require
> that all messaging is done very securely with guarantees of authenticity a
> given. What this ends up being specifically is yet to be decided I think.
>

How does ILP handle identity?

In particular what strings are used to

1. Denote a ledger
2. Denote a participate in a ledger, or common participant in two or more
ledgers


>
> Is a secure transport like TLS and signed messages using a unique keypair
> for each entity enough. Do the keys need to be part of a chain that is
> rooted at some specific entity (perhaps for regulatory reasons)?
>
> Lots of models and architectures to consider.
>
> What will be required is establishing some standards for how identity data
> will be conveyed and here we should probably look at how this is already
> done in message standards like ISO 20022 rather than re-invent the data
> dictionary?
>