Re: Credentials Task Force proposal

> I would argue the same problems can be solved by Macaroons alone, but it seems this WG is looking more for a meta-standard than a one-size-fits-all solution to bless.

Positing it wise to dig deeper into this observation Tony makes here, which was also made (in a different manner of speaking) by Erik in a previous post: "meta-standard than a one-size-fits-all"??

-- 
Heritage & Legacy Advisory | Multi-Generational Wealth Preservation
 
Arie Y. LEVY-COHEN
FINANCIAL ADVISOR | INTERNATIONAL CLIENT ADVISOR
PRIVATE WEALTH MANAGEMENT | NEW YORK
ECONOMICS | FINANCE | BLOCKCHAIN
P: 917.692.6999

> On Nov 6, 2015, at 8:12 PM, Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Friday, November 6, 2015, Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>> Right. Macaroons are about authentication as "bearer credentials"
>> typically are.
> 
> Macaroons are a nuanced idea. They can act as bearer credentials but also support confinement via contextual caveats.
>  
>> I meant credentials that refer to identification, which I
>> believe to be the primary focus of the work the task force is exploring.
> 
> Again, Macaroons are a nuanced idea. The features of third party caveats and discharge macaroons are applicable to privacy-preserving identity providers.
>  
>> We could use these credentials in conjunction with macaroon caveats
>> (which seems to be one of the primary use cases for caveats). In other
>> words, these technologies can complement each other (which is what I
>> believe you were alluding to, so we're in agreement).
> 
> I would argue the same problems can be solved by Macaroons alone, but it seems this WG is looking more for a meta-standard than a one-size-fits-all solution to bless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tony Arcieri
>