John W. - that is one very good candidate - it would, of course, need more detail at this stage to spur the need for a WG. One way to view a WG is through questions like: - Which technical or policy audience needs a consensus standard, guidance or tool? - Is there a state of practice or new regulation/legislation that is ready for compliance and conformance development and even certification? - Is there a consensus position or opinion that needs to be articulated in order to rally the industry and inform a specific audience? - Is there a group of related activities or initiatives that would benefit from an umbrella document to knit the parts together and bring cohesion to the disparate work? The mission of a WG is to create useful artifacts for a well-scoped, well-defined audience through consensus-based collaboration. This mission is easy to execute when participants with a strong interest in the outcome/output are engaged (otherwise WGs drift). andrew. *Andrew Hughes *CISM CISSP Independent Consultant *In Turn Information Management Consulting* o +1 650.209.7542 m +1 250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ *Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security * On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:03 AM, John Wunderlich <john@wunderlich.ca> wrote:
Colin;
Given the constraints/opportunities it occurs to me that the DG report should seek to articulate the Terms of Reference for a Kantara WG whose goal would be to define and work to create a Proof Of Concent instantiation of a Blockchain and/or SmartContract ecosystem that will move the user centred identity concept closer to fruition, if that makes sense?
Sincerely, John Wunderlich @PrivacyCDN
Call: +1 (647) 669-4749 eMail: john@wunderlich.ca
On 29 August 2016 at 10:34, Colin Wallis <colin_wallis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks John M, John W, James, Patrick et al
I think we are all in agreement we could do with more input from the broader BC and SC communities. And of course that is most welcomed, moreso if they bring their own communities with them and join Kantara which helps pay for the platform on which the DG rests:-).
I'm also sensitive to the LC Chair Andrew's motivation to bring DG discussions to a conclusion at frequent intervals (typically 6 months) in order to get onto the work of addressing the issues that the DG use cases and deliberations raise.
These two things are not mutually exclusive. We can have a WG working on solutions arising from a DG output, while at the same time having a DG continue to draw in more use cases and discussion. The Charters need to be directed and focussed accordingly and the timelines clear.
John W's estimates are about right. We started this DG in May, so we need to have it concluded November latest. Take off a month of writing and there is 2 months left.
It is really tempting to slip the timeline to allow more discussion in a DG, as a preface to WG work. But past experience has shown us that that often comes at the expense of focussing the resulting WG on nailing the solutions to the problems raised, to a logical formal end deliverable in a community-valuable timeframe. There is so much to do in this space. Biting it off in a continual process of digestible chunks is absolutely OK.
Cheers Colin
------------------------------ *From:* John Moehrke <johnmoehrke@gmail.com> *Sent:* 29 August 2016 13:42 *To:* James Hazard *Cc:* Colin Wallis; dg-bsc@kantarainitiative.org *Subject:* Re: [DG-BSC] FYI
I have a potential new use of Blockchain and Smart-Contracts. I have written it up using the template, but don't yet have rights on the Kantara system. I have published what I have developed with a friend of mine (Health Informaticist and Researcher) onto my Blog. I am happy to submit it fully to the Kantara DG-BSC efforts if the community is interested.
The use-case is Evidence Notebooks (aka Lab Notebooks, or Patent Notebooks).
https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2016/08/blockchain -and-smart-contracts-applied.html Healthcare CyberPrivacy: Blockchain and Smart-Contracts applied to Evidence Notebook <https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2016/08/blockchain-and-smart-contracts-applied.html> healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com
John
John Moehrke Principal Engineering Architect: Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security CyberPrivacy – Enabling authorized communications while respecting Privacy M +1 920-564-2067 JohnMoehrke@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnmoehrke https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" ("Who watches the watchers?")
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:26 AM, James Hazard <james.g.hazard@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Colin,
I think it might be helpful to have wider representation of the blockchain community on the thread. I mention the DG-BSC when I am in conversation with them.
On deliverables, I think we have spent good time well on discussing what blockchains and smart contracts are and aren't, and could do more on how they fit into a broader picture of automation, institutions, privacy and security. (Elements of the blockchain community, IMHO, sometimes think they don't need to think about institutions, since ridding the world of institutions is the goal of decentralization.)
I suggest that we could:
Describe a general "smart contract" paradigm on the lines of:
i) events - (Barclay's and R3's "parameters") ii) text objects ("prose," actors, things, places, etc.) iii) Smart Contract Description Language iv) code
We could describe the relationship between this "smart contract" record of relationships and transactions, on the one hand, and various databases on the other.
We could describe some uses cases where blockchain databases were useful.
This would not exclude developing use-case verticals. The consent to use of genetic information use case seems potent.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Colin Wallis <colin_wallis@hotmail.com> wrote:
Thanks All
Interesting thoughts and discussion.
Indeed we could invite some other folks not engaged here to add their use cases.
But it would need to be pretty soon.
We are more than half way through the 6 month period for collecting use cases, allowing some time for the report to be written up with recommendations on what work we might take forward to a WG to deliver a specific useful tangible output.
There is plenty of talk in this domain. But Kantara value proposition that it is about 'doing', and the community will be the better for a useful deliverable as a result. Let's not divert from that goal.
That said, there is nothing to stop another DG, or a re-charter of this DG, working on a another suite of use cases perhaps for a particular context.
Cheers
Colin
------------------------------ *From:* dg-bsc-bounces@kantarainitiative.org < dg-bsc-bounces@kantarainitiative.org> on behalf of Patrick Curry < patrick.curry@bbfa.info> *Sent:* 28 August 2016 22:15 *To:* James Hazard *Cc:* dg-bsc@kantarainitiative.org *Subject:* Re: [DG-BSC] FYI
The devil is in the detail and also in the minds of innovators and start ups.
Back end transactions of smart contracts differ from the smart contracts in BCs with their transparency property. My colleagues see a difference and it is giving rise to new user cases. One involves the ability of all parties in a police incident to be able to validate that the legally permitted individual policeman is assigned to a specific task for that incident in real time based on his skills, training, authority etc. The rules are being executed in a distributed fashion with distributed inputs, all assured. This particular example is in the concept stage. However, there is another international logistic example. leveraging an existing pilot, that is expected to move into implementation soon.
I’ll speak to Colin. We could be inviting some of the more forward BC companies to engage in the KI discussion.
regards,
Patrick
Patrick Curry Director
British Business Federation Authority - BBFA Ltd M: +44 786 024 9074 T: +44 1980 620606 patrick.curry@bbfa.info www.bbfa.info – a not-for-profit, self-regulating body
On 28 Aug 2016, at 20:07, James Hazard <james.g.hazard@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, IPFS is a very useful resource.
The chain of consent to use of information seems to unify many use cases. A few links in the chain from prior threads in the discussion:
Patient consent from our discussion earlier this week: http://www.commonaccord.org/index.php?action=doc&file=/GH/Ka ntaraInitiative/DG-BSC/Consent/Use1/05-AliceGrants.md
Data transfer agreements on the EU "Model Clauses": http://www.commonaccord.org/index.php?action=doc&file=Wx/eu/ europa/eur-lex/Privacy/ModelClauses/EN/Demo/0.md (Available in 20+ languages, about six of which are in the demo).
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu> wrote:
Jim,
With regards to legal contracts for data-sharing, this could be (should be) a good use-case for BSC.
/thomas/
________________________________________ From: Jim Willeke [jim@willeke.com] Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2016 9:56 AM To: John Wunderlich Cc: Thomas Hardjono; dg-bsc@kantarainitiative.org Subject: Re: [DG-BSC] FYI
I agree with /thomas/. There is no reason smart contracts could not be done via a protocol with the back-end system be unknown.
IPFS could be used as an example.
JLINC<http://www.jlinclabs.com/protocol/> is one such idea.
-- -jim Jim Willeke
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:24 AM, John Wunderlich <john@wunderlich.ca <mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>> wrote: Blockchains of adherence?
If smart contracts are published on well known URI’s, then agreeing to them by signing the contract and putting the MAC on the blockchain provides some level of assurance. This becomes even more powerful when the smart contract can accept or negotiate terms and what gets recorded on the blockchain memorialized the terms freely negotiated by both parties bots.
???
Sincerely, John Wunderlich @PrivacyCDN
Call: +1 (647) 669-4749<tel:%2B1%20%28647%29%20669- <%2B1%20%28647%29%20669->4749> eMail: john@wunderlich.ca<mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>
On 28 August 2016 at 08:20, Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu<mailto: hardjono@mit.edu>> wrote:
Thanks John,
Good piece.
I think there is still a lot of confusion about the promise of smart-contracts executing collectively on a syntax-rich set of nodes, vs the very limited Bitcoin-blockchain of today.
Maybe BSC-DG could come up with our own new terms or language to describe the possible features of smart contracts.
/thomas/
___________________________________
On Aug 27, 2016, at 11:48 PM, John Wunderlich <john@wunderlich.ca <mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>> wrote:
https://theconversation.com/blockchain-really-only-does-one- thing-well-62668
Thanks, John 4giv spellin errurz from mobile devize
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@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
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@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
_______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
-- @commonaccord _______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
-- @commonaccord
_______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
_______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc
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@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc