- DG-BSC - mailman.kantarainitiative.org

Notes from BSC telecon Thursday August 16
by Eve Maler 16 Aug '16

16 Aug '16

http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-08+%28August+2016%… Agenda: - Technology subsection candidate: describing and analyzing "blockchain" (Jeff and Eve) - Vs. "smart contract"? - Use case content mappings to technology content Attending: Eve, John W, Domenico, Scott S, Thomas, Jeff, Scott D (deeply interested in progress in distributed systems that are reliable), Jim, Andrew, John M, Colin Looking at Eve's candidate definition of blockchain: The second bullet: The value is transparency, is not privacy per se. Or secrecy per se? Transparency isn't necessarily inconsistent with privacy. Data controllers need to be transparent. If many of the risks are controlled for by putting all the nodes in the same cloud or the same organizational domain (where "distributed" is defined in a very special way), it's still a blockchain. There's support for the three bullets at least as a starter definition, along with the "SWOT" subbullets beneath them. Jeff believes that the only requirement for it to be a blockchain is a particular encryption mechanism for the ledger, but we didn't reach (ahem) consensus on that. Let's share the writeups on the list and see if we can form a draft subsection shortly, and then leverage the SWOTs and other analyses to build our understanding of how well the use cases can be served by the technologies and techniques. Eve makes an exhortation for use cases not to *assume* use of technologies, but to *test* them for suitability. *Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl *ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits* are coming to <http://summits.forgerock.com/> *London and Paris!*

2 1

Fwd: Brief writeup on blockchain technology
by Eve Maler 16 Aug '16

16 Aug '16

*Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl *ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits* are coming to <http://summits.forgerock.com/> *London and Paris!* ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eve Maler <eve.maler(a)forgerock.com> Date: Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 1:06 PM Subject: Brief writeup on blockchain technology To: j stollman <stollman.j(a)gmail.com> Tell me what you think of this... I'm sure you will have many corrections! What I was going for was a high-level value-based pocket explanation that would mean a lot to a lot of different audiences. :-) I only recently stuck the few links in there. ==== Following are the key elements of blockchain technology and their value. Other technologies can be blockchain-like if they have some of these elements, but are not considered true blockchains. - A tamper-evident “ledger” (linear, append-only) data structure - Valuable for recording events that definitely happened - Less valuable for recording any information that is uncertain or required to be deleted (such as personal information for which a “right to be forgotten/right to erasure” has been established) - Autonomous, distributed, and possibly even decentralized (no node has higher privileges) storage nodes - Valuable for architectures where trust in a central authority is difficult or undesirable to establish (although trusted third parties do play a role in some blockchain deployments anyway; see third bullet below) - Less valuable for recording sensitive information because of the increased attack surface (every node has a copy of everything) and resulting increased privacy considerations - Less valuable for recording voluminous information because every node has a copy of everything - Mathematically based (algorithmic) consensus for contents of new ledger entries - Valuable for incentivizing cooperative behaviors among node participants about entry contents (“proof of work” as used in Bitcoin is the most famous) - Less valuable if other parts of the “BLT sandwich” (business-legal-technical) are not well controlled for through IAM, trust frameworks, etc. -- e.g., multiple node participants can collude to game the system -- but then decentralization goals can be compromised thereby Blockchain technology is a platform, not a ready-made application. There are “public blockchains” on which applications can be built; two of the most well-known are Bitcoin and Ethereum. (N.B.: A recent (Jul-Aug 2016) hack and fork <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum#The_DAO_and_the_blockchain_fork> have left the Ethereum blockchain split into two, Ethereum and Ethereum Classic, showing the extreme volatility of this space. See also the Blockchain Graveyard <https://magoo.github.io/Blockchain-Graveyard/> detailing the many startups that have already died due to hacks.) These can be thought of as being something like “public cloud services” for blockchain. There are also open-source implementations of blockchain that can be deployed internally within an organization; depending on how they’re deployed, they can be thought of us being something like “private cloud” blockchains. There are also many blockchain-related tools, SDKs, and app platforms that ride on top of these base layers, much like other development platforms. *Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl *ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits* are coming to <http://summits.forgerock.com/> *London and Paris!*

1 0

Agenda for BSC telecon Thursday August 15
by Eve Maler 15 Aug '16

15 Aug '16

http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-08+%28August+2016%… We meet *Tuesdays* for 30 minutes at 7:30am PT / 10:30am ET / 3:30pm UK / 4:30pm CET. We use Kantara Line A (US +1-805-309-2350, Skype +99051000000481, international options <https://www.turbobridge.com/international.html>, web interface <https://panel.turbobridge.com/webcall/>, more info <https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>, code 4022737) and http://join.me/findthomas for screen sharing. See the DG calendar <http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Calendar> for our full meeting schedule. Previous meeting minutes are here: July <http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-07+%28July+2016%29…> . Agenda: - Technology subsection candidate: describing and analyzing "blockchain" (Jeff and Eve) - Vs. "smart contract"? - Use case content mappings to technology content *Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl *ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits* are coming to <http://summits.forgerock.com/> *London and Paris!*

1 0

blockchain solution candidate for study
by j stollman 15 Aug '16

15 Aug '16

I would like to propose that we evaluate voting as a blockchain application possibility. In the same way the blockchain is used in Bitcoin to prevent double spending, it could be used to prevent double voting. There are a few issues which need to be resolved,including: 1. voter registration and credential assignment (at the worst, it could follow the same process used today) 2. supporting voter's recovery of forgotton credentials 3. protecting the re-identification of a voter's identity Jeff --------------------------------- Jeff Stollman stollman.j(a)gmail.com +1 202.683.8699 <stollman.j(a)gmail.com> Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out. Science advances one funeral at a time. Max Planck

1 0

Agenda for BSC telecon Thursday August 4
by Eve Maler 11 Aug '16

11 Aug '16

http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-08+%28August+2016%… We meet *Thursdays* for 30 minutes at 11am PT / 2pm ET / 7pm UK / 8pm CET. We use Kantara Line A (US +1-805-309-2350, Skype +99051000000481, international options <https://www.turbobridge.com/international.html>, web interface <https://panel.turbobridge.com/webcall/>, more info <https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>, code 4022737) and http://join.me/findthomas for screen sharing. See the DG calendar <http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Calendar> for our full meeting schedule. Agenda: - Observation: DG is at the one-month mark - Can we add something like a "technology SWOT analysis" to Alice participates in Bob's Research Study <http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Alice+participates+in+B…> as a criterion for approving it as complete? - Plotting and analyzing aspects of blockchain overall, smart contracts, CmA, other related tech – see the report outline <http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Report+from+the+Blockch…> - Do we want to categorize use cases/organize them into a taxonomy? Is this helpful for our report purposes? - What use cases do we want to take up next week? (Scott as chair pro tem on Tuesday) *Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl *ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits* are coming to <http://summits.forgerock.com/> *Sydney, London, and Paris!*

3 2

Example of scare & snare
by John Wunderlich 09 Aug '16

09 Aug '16

I took a screen shot of this to ensure that you don’t get any drive by links from it, but this is typical of the scare and snare advertising made possible by the relatively abysmal level of security practiced by most health information custodians. Also highlights why auditing, logging and transparency with respect to health data are important issues. Auditing and logging are relatively well understood in IT, but transparency is a new concept - especially for security practitioners. If a public ledger is a transparency tool allowing organizations to prove that they are doing what they say are doing, the question will be how do you provide that transparency will providing appropriate security and privacy safeguards with respect to the underlying personal data/ Sincerely, John Wunderlich @PrivacyCDN Call: +1 (647) 669-4749 eMail: john(a)wunderlich.ca -- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

2 1

From: Ann Vroom RE: of interest, article link re: consent model in UK NHS ...
by M AV 09 Aug '16

09 Aug '16

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/08/some_benefits_of_digital_health_to_… From: dg-bsc-bounces(a)kantarainitiative.org [mailto:dg-bsc-bounces@kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of Scott Shorter Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 9:06 AM To: dg-bsc(a)kantarainitiative.org Subject: [DG-BSC] Agenda for BSC telecon Tuesday August 9 http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-08+%28August+2016%… We meet Tuesdays for 30 minutes at 10:30am ET. We use Kantara Line A (US +1-805-309-2350, Skype +99051000000481, international options<https://www.turbobridge.com/international.html>, web interface<https://panel.turbobridge.com/webcall/>, more info<https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>, code 4022737) and (today only) http://join.me/findscott for screen sharing. See the DG calendar<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Calendar> for our full meeting schedule. Agenda: · Review Certificate Transparency<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Certificate+Transparency> use case · Discuss potential use cases · Privacy-Preserving Data Sharing on Blockchain P2P Nodes (Thomas) · General Wellness Product (John W) · Others? Thanks! - Scott Scott Shorter - Vice President, Security sshorter(a)kimbleassociates.com<mailto:sshorter@kimbleassociates.com> On Aug 3, 2016, at 10:50 PM, Eve Maler <eve.maler(a)forgerock.com<mailto:eve.maler@forgerock.com>> wrote: http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2016-08+%28August+2016%… We meet Thursdays for 30 minutes at 11am PT / 2pm ET / 7pm UK / 8pm CET. We use Kantara Line A (US +1-805-309-2350, Skype +99051000000481, international options<https://www.turbobridge.com/international.html>, web interface<https://panel.turbobridge.com/webcall/>, more info<https://www.turbobridge.com/join.html>, code 4022737) and http://join.me/findthomas for screen sharing. See the DG calendar<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Calendar> for our full meeting schedule. Agenda: * Observation: DG is at the one-month mark * Can we add something like a "technology SWOT analysis" to Alice participates in Bob's Research Study<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Alice+participates+in+B…> as a criterion for approving it as complete? * Plotting and analyzing aspects of blockchain overall, smart contracts, CmA, other related tech – see the report outline<http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/Report+from+the+Blockch…> * Do we want to categorize use cases/organize them into a taxonomy? Is this helpful for our report purposes? * What use cases do we want to take up next week? (Scott as chair pro tem on Tuesday) Eve Maler ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl ForgeRock Summits and UnSummits are coming to<http://summits.forgerock.com/> Sydney, London, and Paris! _______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC(a)kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc

1 0

General wellness products use case?
by john＠wunderlich.ca 07 Aug '16

07 Aug '16

The FDA has done the heavy lifting in terms of describing the use case... http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/gui… Thanks, John Wunderlich @PrivacyCDN Pleez 4give speling errurs, sent from a mobile device. -- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

1 0

Re: [DG-BSC] Blockstack identity services
by James Hazard 04 Aug '16

04 Aug '16

JimW - yes, IAMAL, but that's my understanding. Merkel is the root. Patrick - I was unaware of Zittrain's work on this balance of security. If you have link ... ? If banks or other "regulated databases" (phrase from Circle) act as hosts and intermediaries, the platform could fine-tune the balances between oversight and privacy. Parts can be encrypted end to end, so the bank and others know very little. Parts could be encrypted on the way to the bank and then decrypted and recrypted as appropriate. Of course, any hub could act in this role, and I am not pitching on behalf of banks. But, as a lawyer looking to piece together a solution, banks have the advantages that they are highly regulated, quasi-local, already custodians of our creepiest data, and numerous (as opposed to telcos and e-commerce giants which will bump into monopoly issues). There is a long-standing relationship (in civil law systems there is even a general principle of bank secrecy). It is imperfect, and abused, but their is a conversation chain of bank and regulator, with legislature, customers, activists and public. They are nodes with lots of edges. A shared record format enables portability and open source would make it cheap to be a bank - giving the customer leverage and keeping intermediaries focused on their mission. I did a sketch of what it might look like to treat (all of) banking as a file system - http://www.commonaccord.org/index.php?action=list&file=bqc/fr/bnpp/a5we/ The context is French banks and an effort by "LaBChain" - the French finance industry's exploration of blockchains. So I used French examples, and demonstrate how they could be helpful to enterprise formation and capitalization by curating legal documentation. Here the "identities" are bank accounts, "roles" that are well-anchored in local law. On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Jim Willeke <jim(a)willeke.com> wrote: > All of the technologies we are speaking about are Distributed Database > or Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLTs) and more specifically a type of > Hash Tree or Merkel Tree <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree>. > > There are many common examples besides the crypto-currencies including > BitTorrent, GIT, and many NoSQL databases. > > > -- > -jim > Jim Willeke > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 5:50 AM, James Hazard <james.g.hazard(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Patrick, >> >> Great message. My father, who taught and practiced law, said the >> conversation should start with where you want to be. >> >> That seems to me to be more or less the P2P, PDS, MIT Connection Science >> vision. Each of us has our formal existence in databases under our >> control. Each of our records interoperates with all of our other records. >> We can store them at trust providers (e.g., banks) like we do with cash, >> and carry only what we need. An app, on phones and anywhere else we want >> it, allows us to transact with anyone - or any thing - else. To have >> different accounts for different roles. To have our information be only in >> the places that it must be to interact with the network. This has lots of >> parallels with email. >> >> The rules of engagement - the stuff that good lawyers put into documents >> for smart clients - is clear, fast, free. We navigate bureaucracy - and >> weigh the trade-offs - like we use Waze. >> >> In this view, blockchains are a tool for syncing records. So are IPFS >> and Interledger, and git, and all of the existing or new payment systems. >> Blockchains, with their methods for peer-based consensus on the state of >> the record and their anti-double spend appear useful - necessary - when >> there is no 3rd party trust provider - or the trust provider can't be >> reached. The IoT is full of those use cases. >> >> This - which just came across my twitter feed - seems quite good at >> exploring when a blockchain is necessary (though perhaps the thinking does >> not include the possibility of a multiplicity of blockchains, used like >> email threads). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/when-do-you-need- >> blockchain-decision-models-sebastien-meunier (Is the reference to our >> Bart Suichies?). >> >> All this is independent of, but a powerful driving force for, my project >> and concern, bringing the dynamic of open source collaboration to the >> negotiation and codification of legal forms. Codification of boilerplate >> (@gendal's "prose") indirectly codifies the law, and enables a >> decentralized Waze approach to bureaucracy. >> >> All good, Jim >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Patrick Curry <patrick.curry(a)bbfa.info> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi James, >>> >>> Interesting. Good discussion, thanks. I offer a few comments. >>> >>> Block chain refers to a specific, defined technology. Blockchain is a >>> trademark. >>> >>> Do we mean solutions or requirements? Are the solutions technology >>> specific or general solutions to a business problem, where a block chain >>> may feature as part of the solution set? >>> >>> If we replace Proof of Work with PKI Federation, which is attractive & >>> desirable in many situations, do we still have a block chain? My block >>> chain colleagues believe that we still do, and there is an ongoing >>> discussion about how PoW might be measured to achieve some sort of LoA that >>> could map, in policy terms, to PKI and create a basis for for BC - PKI >>> federation. >>> >>> The voting process presents several complexities, some of which could be >>> addressed by an underlying trust fabric. There hasn’t been much discussion >>> about this yet, but it will definitely be moving there later this year as >>> the UK government has just approved its first BC provider to be listed in a >>> catalogue service available to all UK gov organisations. >>> >>> A feature of BCs being used in regulated settings is that the regulator >>> (regulators in many cases, particularly internationally) requires to have a >>> voting node and so gets to see all traffic. Regulators haven’t woken up to >>> this yet, but I am expecting to see them require the development of >>> rulesets that are embedded in the process in the BC with decision authority >>> (signature), i.e. a smart contract. I don’t understand why this would be >>> a bug. A feature or a factor, yes. >>> >>> Ref data management, the smart contract is a feature of permissioned >>> block chains because of how the cryptography works. It’s hard to see how >>> this functionality could be replicated easily in other existing >>> technologies. Instead, what is beginning to happen is that companies link >>> their ERP etc to the block chain. The ERP provides the internal business >>> functionality and logic, the block chain DLT provides the external >>> interoperability & contract integrity. The smart contract runs on the >>> chain, not on in the enterprise app. This satisfies the supply chain >>> requirements where a centralised enterprise solution would/does not. >>> >>> Agree about data replication. Depending on the nature of the business >>> requirement and use cases, data minimisation is one of the privacy >>> principles. Proofs of concept on some Zero Knowledge Proof mechanisms have >>> been completed and a couple are moving to bigger pilots. ZKP and other >>> anonymised attribute assurance mechanisms are attractive and suitable >>> options for block chain privacy requirements. >>> >>> Interesting that you mention Zittrain. His work on trusted >>> intermediaries has come up in international discussions of lead industries, >>> law enforcement and govs, as a way to address policy collisions on public >>> safety and privacy. The discussions are more about encryption and key >>> management; block chains haven’t yet been discussed, but they might be. I >>> agree about JSON. I’d be interested in knowing more about your and Eve’s >>> work in this area. is there anything you can share? >>> >>> regards, >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> Patrick Curry >>> Director >>> >>> British Business Federation Authority - BBFA Ltd >>> M: +44 786 024 9074 >>> T: +44 1980 620606 >>> patrick.curry(a)bbfa.info >>> www.bbfa.info – a not-for-profit, self-regulating body >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3 Aug 2016, at 15:08, James Hazard <james.g.hazard(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Though "Blockchain" is in the title of this discussion group, it need >>> not be in all of the solutions. "Blockchains" have large privacy and data >>> security challenges built into maintaining consensus on the state of the >>> ledger (database). Most real life situations have available a range of >>> alternative means of validating the state of the ledger. For instance, a >>> regulator. >>> >>> So, we might view it as a bug, rather than a feature, if a "smart >>> contract" solution requires execution on a blockchain. >>> >>> Organizations and humans will want to be able to efficiently manage >>> large numbers of ledger entries, in efficient databases (SQL, graph, IPFS), >>> not blockchains. They will need to be able to run the smart contracts on >>> those other platforms. >>> >>> Data replication should be minimized, and temporary to the extent >>> possible. This will, I think, also be required by GDPR. >>> >>> The necessary point of agreement, the waist of the Zittrain hourglass, >>> is very small - a format for ledger entries. CommonAccord asserts (I >>> assert on its behalf) that the key to this is ... key/values, a way of >>> resolving references, and inheritance. For good reasons, JSON is a likely >>> to be the most common "punctuation" (Eve's word) for exchange of ledger >>> entries. Our current rendering engine uses plain text and carriage >>> returns. That is the lightest "punctuation" and may be the best for >>> collaboration on big texts, notably for collaboration among lawyers and >>> regulators on Github. It closely parallels the presentation of software >>> source code. But this barely matters. What matters is a common approach >>> to linking and inheritance. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 6:53 AM, John Wunderlich <john(a)wunderlich.ca> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Domenico; >>>> >>>> As soon as the use case makes Alice's role that of a "Citizen" a whole >>>> raft of non-technical issues arise that should be addressed. How do you >>>> implement privacy protection into the architecture to avoid abuse by >>>> authoritarian regimes? If I think of all the cases where I'm asked to >>>> present government issued ID as proof of identity, and then ask, "Would it >>>> be a good thing if there was an permanent audit trail available to the >>>> government (any state agency) of all those interactions?" >>>> >>>> I would restate your problem definition to see if we can design a wide >>>> identity ecosystem use case for managing citizen identities that enables >>>> (or better, only works if) citizens control their own identities. >>>> >>>> (PS, see my signature block below, apropos of this issue) >>>> >>>> John Wunderlich, >>>> >>>> Sent frum a mobile device, >>>> Pleez 4give speling erurz >>>> >>>> "...a world of near-total surveillance and endless record-keeping is >>>> likely to be one with less liberty, less experimentation, and certainly far >>>> less joy..." A. Michael Froomkin >>>> >>>> _____________________________ >>>> From: Domenico Catalano <domenico.catalano(a)oracle.com> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 4:47 AM >>>> Subject: [DG-BSC] Blockstack identity services >>>> To: <dg-bsc(a)kantarainitiative.org> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> maybe, you already know blockstack id technology for identity services, >>>> at blockstack.org <https://blockstack.org/docs/how-blockstack-works> >>>> >>>> I think it’s quite useful for investigation and for defining use cases. >>>> >>>> I was wondering whether we can provide a wide identity ecosystem use >>>> case for managing citizen identities. >>>> >>>> Consider the following high level use case: >>>> >>>> - The Citizen is identified by a Blockchain-ready Registry. >>>> - The Citizen requests to register with the Registry through a specific >>>> mobile app, which provides the necessary cryptographic key pairs with which >>>> the request is signed. >>>> - The Registry includes the request in the blockchain which is >>>> distributed among the nodes, as smart contract. >>>> - The mobile app and the cryptographic keys are now able to provides >>>> strong authentication mechanisms for citizen online access. >>>> >>>> Citizen Identity can be enriched through the blockchain nodes (special >>>> nodes) interactions which provide attribute/profile attestation. >>>> >>>> I hope it’s useful for further discussions. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Domenico >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and >>>> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are >>>> addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the >>>> system manager. This message contains confidential information and is >>>> intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee >>>> you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify >>>> the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by >>>> mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the >>>> intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing >>>> or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is >>>> strictly prohibited. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> DG-BSC mailing list >>>> DG-BSC(a)kantarainitiative.org >>>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> @commonaccord >>> _______________________________________________ >>> DG-BSC mailing list >>> DG-BSC(a)kantarainitiative.org >>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> @commonaccord >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DG-BSC mailing list >> DG-BSC(a)kantarainitiative.org >> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc >> >> > -- @commonaccord

1 0

Blockstack identity services
by Domenico Catalano 04 Aug '16

04 Aug '16

Hi all, maybe, you already know blockstack id technology for identity services, at blockstack.org <https://blockstack.org/docs/how-blockstack-works> I think it’s quite useful for investigation and for defining use cases. I was wondering whether we can provide a wide identity ecosystem use case for managing citizen identities. Consider the following high level use case: - The Citizen is identified by a Blockchain-ready Registry. - The Citizen requests to register with the Registry through a specific mobile app, which provides the necessary cryptographic key pairs with which the request is signed. - The Registry includes the request in the blockchain which is distributed among the nodes, as smart contract. - The mobile app and the cryptographic keys are now able to provides strong authentication mechanisms for citizen online access. Citizen Identity can be enriched through the blockchain nodes (special nodes) interactions which provide attribute/profile attestation. I hope it’s useful for further discussions. Thanks Domenico

5 6