Wrt Tom, yes technically
From: Bev Corwin
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM
To: peace@acm.org
Cc: Noreen Whysel ; jim kragh ;
Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn
; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas
Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ;
Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ;
wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen
; Amanda Gay
Subject: Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the
Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.
Tom, and if an individual is unable to "present" I disagree with your
assumptions
On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 11:45 AM Tom Jones mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com > wrote:
Trust relationships may or may not be established prior to any individual
transaction. They must not be made a precondition to the request for
identifier information. Explaining the establishment and maintenance of trust
relationships does not seem to help inclusion which is the topic at hand.
What is important is the presentation of sufficient information to allow the
holder to make a trust decision.
thx ..Tom (mobile)
On Tue, Aug 6, 2024, 4:05 AM Noreen Whysel mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com > wrote:
That is helpful, Tom. So to be clear, for the purposes of identification, a
Trust Relationship is established in a data transaction once a trust anchor is
verified? Ie certificate exists and data is transferred, therefore entity A is
now in a Trust Relationship with Entity B.
Is this true only in a software transaction or could one diagram it in a human
trust relationship that Jim is talking about? It could be that you are talking
about something on two very different levels.
Noreen
On Aug 6, 2024, at 1:42 AM, Tom Jones mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com > wrote:
The problem with that is that the relationship is defined AFTER the
transaction completes, whereas the value in the request is prior to to the
formation of the trust relationship. The trust Anchor for health interchange
is defined by onc/tefca which cannot be altered or approved by the patient.
BTW, that piece was NOT added while I was editing the doc so I cannot justify
it.
thx ..Tom (mobile)
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024, 7:20 PM Noreen Whysel mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com > wrote:
Yes. Do we need to define “trust relationship” in our lists of terms? Can we
say that the trust relationship is the human component of assurance in which
an individual shares data with a provider they deem trustworthy, and that the
trust anchor is the technology component, embodied in a root certificate, for
example, that provides identity assurance of the individual?
Noreen
On Aug 5, 2024, at 9:59 PM, kragh65@gmail.com mailto:kragh65@gmail.com
wrote:
Tom, in the healthcare sector, especially in underserved communities a
relationship with a nurse, social worker or a non-profit entity or faith based
entity serving that community is where relational trust is nurtured and built.
In my 20+ years in the healthcare sector, I have never heard the term “trust
anchor’ used as it relates to a ‘trusted’ relationship, especially a health
care relationship. But understanding you are the DII Editor and there is a
taxonomy in the DII that defines what a TA is in that domain, so be it. I am
grateful for your leadership and support is making this document a reality, a
foundation for a potential project. On be half of our WG collogues and
Kantara, thank you. I will support your recommendation. Jim
From: Tom Jones mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com >
Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM
To: jim kragh mailto:kragh65@gmail.com >
Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com >;
Salvatore D'Agostino mailto:sal@idmachines.com >; Simone
Alcorn mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com >; Bev
Corwin mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com >; Isha Chhatwal
mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com >; Thomas Sullivan
mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com >; Jeff Brennan
mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net >; Justin Byrd
mailto:justin@machi-systems.com >; Jorge Flores
mailto:jorge@entidad.io >; wg-riup
mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org >; Kay
Chopard Cohen mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org >;
Amanda Gay mailto:amanda@kantarainitiative.org
Subject: Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the
Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.
as i indicated the last time this came up, I don't know what a trust
relationship is or why that would exist. The Trust Anchor is at least defined
in the taxonomy.
Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 5:26 PM jim kragh mailto:kragh65@gmail.com > wrote:
I was informed last week that we have a new 'Join Zoom Meeting #:and access
code:
ATTENTION WE HAVE A N NEW Join Zoom Meeting link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87605872193?pwd=HQI7AJKhLvpgtUxKyOYANVUKzsZW3U.1
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87605872193?pwd=HQI7AJKhLvpgtUxKyOYANVUKzsZW3U.1
Meeting ID: 876 0587 2193
Passcode: 157149 A list of call numbers was not provided and if a list of #
's are available I will ask Amanda to share such with us tomorrow morning..
Good evening!
The revised DII document link is below and Tom, Sal, Noreen and I again
reviewed and addressed items that needed attention that were accepted. The
attached DII has a few fine tuning thoughts by Noreen and me for your review,
comments and or corrections. Please read the document and be prepared
to vote or provide a proxy so we can forward the DII to the LC Chair; thank
you.
The Kantara Leadership Council will be meeting next week, and if tomorrow our
WG accepts changes made, we should be able to place the DII
in their hands for a final review and acceptance. Once that is accomplished,
maybe we can find a funding source and a demonstration partner.
Tom shared with us a Homeland Security notice of six 'wallet' projects DHS
was funding; surely there are others out there - let's discuss..
Have a nice evening,
Jim
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef
Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx