Re: Informal poll: Identity use cases

On 19 May 2014 13:21, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> Over the past two weeks, the Web Payments calls have focused on refining
> the identity use cases down to something that could be reviewed by this
> community as well as the upcoming Web Payments Steering Group. Below is
> the refined list, please indicate whether you approve of the use cases
> by responding with a "+1 to all use cases" in your response to the list.
> If you only want to show your support for a few of them, +1 each one
> individually ignoring the ones that you're ambivalent towards. If you'd
> like to argue against one or more of them as being out of scope for the
> next 3-4 years of work, please mark them as "-1".
>
> Keep in mind that the result of this process will be used as input to
> the Web Payments Steering Group. Even if this community agrees on a
> particular use case, it may be modified or rejected by the Web Payments
> Steering Group.
>
> If you want details about each use case, see the minutes:
>
> https://web-payments.org/minutes/2014-04-30/
> https://web-payments.org/minutes/2014-05-14/
>
> Here's the list:
>
> Use Case: Store basic identity credentials and payment provider
> information on the Web in a way that is easy to share with various
> merchants given authorization by the owner of the identity, and that is
> easy to synchronize between devices.
> Notes: This includes the ability for the identity owner to manage the
> identity information. It does not include the ability for the identity
> owner to automatically sell their identity information.
>
> +1

> Use Case: Transmit one or more pieces of information before a purchase
> occurs such that the identification of participants in a transaction can
> be performed.
>
> +1

> Use Case: Using metadata that is the result of a transaction, discover
> attributes associated with the identity of participants in the transaction.
>
> +1

> Use Case: Digitally verifiable credentials such that a merchant and
> payment processor in a transaction can prove that they have done due
> diligence in verifying the customer's identity (KYC).
>
> +1

> Use Case: Execute a transaction without revealing secrets (i.e.
> identity, passwords, PINs) whose primary purpose is orthogonal to the
> actual transaction.
>
> - I'm not sure i understand the Use Case...


> Use Case: Use an existing, widely deployed identity provider mechanism
> (i.e. OpenID Connect) to integrate with the digital credentials sharing
> and payments initiation process.
>
> +1


> Use Case: Transact with a merchant without revealing any identifying
> information. Identifying information is available to the payment processor.
>
> +1

> Use Case: Enable anonymous transactions such that the identity of the
> customer is not discoverable by merchants or payment processors.
>
> - I think this means completely anonymous - meaning untraceable? if so, -1.

I can see the validity of a use-case that states customer's identity is not
discoverable by the merchant and/or recipient; however i interpret the
'payment processor' to include KYC/AML related requirements.  If Fiduciary
responsibilities are supported (IE: for law-enforcement purposes) then +1.

TimH.

> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
>
>