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 Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; 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. 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

Yes we can, thank you Noreen for your timely and valued assistance. In order to attract funding , your suggestion is the on ramp(in words) , the path way to cultivating a trusted (interactive) relationship; ………[in the underserved domain, this is a slow process.] Jim From: Noreen Whysel Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 10:20 PM To: kragh65@gmail.com Cc: ThomasClinganJones@gmail.com; Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; 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. 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

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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

Noreen, I hope you feel better, sorry to hear that you and your family have COVID again. Take care! Hello all, This discussion caught my attention and reminds me of ongoing challenges for health and human services providers at the intersections of policies and practices by human services' "Trust but Validate" and policies and practices by security + privacy services' "Zero Trust + HIPAA" compliance creating complex trust relationships resulting in barriers to accessibility advancements. Verification and Authentication dynamic tensions can leave vulnerable populations in quagmires and often require human in the loop accommodations for successful outcomes. On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 7:05 AM Noreen Whysel 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

Access must be made available if a right exists - that's is the point. If we didn't make that clear, then we should. But if insufficient information is available to establish a right, then that right does not apply. thx ..Tom (mobile) On Tue, Aug 6, 2024, 8:48 AM Bev Corwin wrote:

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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat...

---

Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

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

Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed! On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

...

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 < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < amanda@kantarainitiative.org> *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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

PS FYI Please keep in mind that not all wards of state have guardians, and research is limited about wards of state without guardians and all other support services, it varies state to state, some report from14% to 84%, so there are many wards of state without anyone to help them with IDs, verification, authentication, etc., and they need to be able to request accommodation. They may not have housing, healthcare, a guardian, social worker, nor anyone to help them. On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:03 PM Justin Byrd wrote:

Hi there,

I won't be able to make it to the meeting after all. I approve the document.

Vote: Yes.

Great work everyone! -J

Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef

---

*Justin Byrd *(He, Him)

PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD

*E:* justin@machi-systems.com

*P:* 570-820-2060

*M:* Book a call with me! https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin

*Machi-Systems, LLC.*

Scranton Life Building

538 Biden St, Suite 528

Scranton, PA 18503

machi-systems.com |

[image: signatureImage]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope.*

This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

------------------------------ *From:* Bev Corwin *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *Subject:* Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed!

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

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 < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

I guess you missed my common sense solution - human in the loop On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 2:28 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Yes, they are a challenge and I know of one. What we need are not more problems to solve but more solutions to those problems. For care facilities we can imagine a smartphone by the bed. For others - can we imagine some means of tracking, like smart cards on a lanyard. We may need to go very intrusive and suggest a chip as we do for our loved pets. Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:48 AM Bev Corwin wrote:

...

PS FYI Please keep in mind that not all wards of state have guardians, and research is limited about wards of state without guardians and all other support services, it varies state to state, some report from14% to 84%, so there are many wards of state without anyone to help them with IDs, verification, authentication, etc., and they need to be able to request accommodation. They may not have housing, healthcare, a guardian, social worker, nor anyone to help them.

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:03 PM Justin Byrd wrote:

...

Hi there,

I won't be able to make it to the meeting after all. I approve the document.

Vote: Yes.

Great work everyone! -J

Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef

---

*Justin Byrd *(He, Him)

PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD

*E:* justin@machi-systems.com

*P:* 570-820-2060

*M:* Book a call with me! https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin

*Machi-Systems, LLC.*

Scranton Life Building

538 Biden St, Suite 528

Scranton, PA 18503

machi-systems.com |

[image: signatureImage]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope.*

This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

------------------------------ *From:* Bev Corwin *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *Subject:* Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed!

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

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 < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < amanda@kantarainitiative.org> *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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat...

---

Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

Up to y'all, I'm just pointing out obvious gaps On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 3:41 PM Noreen Whysel wrote:

No microchips! Haha. Maybe a wax seal with a QR code…

I actually almost started a conversation about legal issues but then deleted it. That would certainly have to be an updated version, as Tom says, if we want to get this through before Fall.

Noreen

On Aug 6, 2024, at 2:28 PM, Tom Jones wrote:

 Yes, they are a challenge and I know of one. What we need are not more problems to solve but more solutions to those problems. For care facilities we can imagine a smartphone by the bed. For others - can we imagine some means of tracking, like smart cards on a lanyard. We may need to go very intrusive and suggest a chip as we do for our loved pets. Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:48 AM Bev Corwin wrote:

...

PS FYI Please keep in mind that not all wards of state have guardians, and research is limited about wards of state without guardians and all other support services, it varies state to state, some report from14% to 84%, so there are many wards of state without anyone to help them with IDs, verification, authentication, etc., and they need to be able to request accommodation. They may not have housing, healthcare, a guardian, social worker, nor anyone to help them.

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:03 PM Justin Byrd wrote:

...

Hi there,

I won't be able to make it to the meeting after all. I approve the document.

Vote: Yes.

Great work everyone! -J

Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef

---

*Justin Byrd *(He, Him)

PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD

*E:* justin@machi-systems.com

*P:* 570-820-2060

*M:* Book a call with me! https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin

*Machi-Systems, LLC.*

Scranton Life Building

538 Biden St, Suite 528

Scranton, PA 18503

machi-systems.com |

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope.*

This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

------------------------------ *From:* Bev Corwin *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *Subject:* Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed!

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

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 < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < amanda@kantarainitiative.org> *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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen ; Amanda Gay < 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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat...

---

Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat...

---

Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

~This is interesting… Britt Blaster just sent this to me…. http://www.xpertweb.com/ -J --- Justin Byrd (He, Him) PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD E: justin@machi-systems.commailto:justin@machi-systems.com P: 570-820-2060 M: Book a call with me!https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin Machi-Systems, LLC. Scranton Life Building 538 Biden St, Suite 528 Scranton, PA 18503 machi-systems.comhttps://machi-systems.com/ | [Logo for the Machi-Systems, LLC. Black text set on transparent background reads, “Machi (Dash) Systems.” Stylized blue “m” at the beginning of the word machi] -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope. This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. From: Tom Jones Reply-To: "peace@acm.org" Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 5:06 PM To: Noreen Whysel Cc: "peace@acm.org" , Bev Corwin , Justin Byrd , Simone Alcorn , Isha Chhatwal , Jeff Brennan , Jorge Flores , wg-riup , Kay Chopard Cohen , Amanda Gay Subject: Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc. Please think about the next doc without worrying much about the current one. What needs to be said? ..tom On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:41 PM Noreen Whysel mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com> wrote: No microchips! Haha. Maybe a wax seal with a QR code… I actually almost started a conversation about legal issues but then deleted it. That would certainly have to be an updated version, as Tom says, if we want to get this through before Fall. Noreen On Aug 6, 2024, at 2:28 PM, Tom Jones mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> wrote: Yes, they are a challenge and I know of one. What we need are not more problems to solve but more solutions to those problems. For care facilities we can imagine a smartphone by the bed. For others - can we imagine some means of tracking, like smart cards on a lanyard. We may need to go very intrusive and suggest a chip as we do for our loved pets. Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:48 AM Bev Corwin mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> wrote: PS FYI Please keep in mind that not all wards of state have guardians, and research is limited about wards of state without guardians and all other support services, it varies state to state, some report from14% to 84%, so there are many wards of state without anyone to help them with IDs, verification, authentication, etc., and they need to be able to request accommodation. They may not have housing, healthcare, a guardian, social worker, nor anyone to help them. On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:03 PM Justin Byrd mailto:justin@machi-systems.com> wrote: Hi there, I won't be able to make it to the meeting after all. I approve the document. Vote: Yes. Great work everyone! -J Get Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef --- Justin Byrd (He, Him) PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD E: justin@machi-systems.commailto:justin@machi-systems.com P: 570-820-2060 M: Book a call with me!https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin Machi-Systems, LLC. Scranton Life Building 538 Biden St, Suite 528 Scranton, PA 18503 machi-systems.comhttps://machi-systems.com/ | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope. This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. ________________________________ From: Bev Corwin mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM To: peace@acm.orgmailto:peace@acm.org mailto:peace@acm.org> Cc: Salvatore D'Agostino mailto:sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.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: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc. Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed! On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> wrote: Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino mailto:sal@idmachines.com> wrote: Wrt Tom, yes technically From: Bev Corwin mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM To: peace@acm.orgmailto:peace@acm.org Cc: Noreen Whysel mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh mailto:kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino mailto:sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.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. 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.commailto: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 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 Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docxhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef _______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP _______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP _______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP _______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.orgmailto:staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

the current technology are 1. Solid PODS from Tim BL 2. Digital Nodes from TBD aka block Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 9:36 AM Noreen Whysel wrote:

I could ask Doc about it. A lot of the links are broken and resources are from 2010 and earlier. There is discussion of a self sovereign digital idea that comes up from time to time on the ProjectVRM Listserv. They’ve been more interested in personal LLM lately. I don’t see anything recently on digital ID.

This is the DIY Digital ID post they linked to in 2003. I got it from the Wayback machine. DIY DigID | Escapable Logic https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06... web.archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06...

https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06... https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06...

Noreen

On Aug 6, 2024, at 6:31 PM, Justin Byrd wrote:



~This is interesting… Britt Blaster just sent this to me…. http://www.xpertweb.com/

-J

---

*Justin Byrd *(He, Him)

PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD

*E:* justin@machi-systems.com

*P:* 570-820-2060

*M:* *Book a call with me! https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin*

*Machi-Systems, LLC.*

Scranton Life Building

538 Biden St, Suite 528

Scranton, PA 18503

machi-systems.com |

**

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope.*

This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

*From: *Tom Jones *Reply-To: *"peace@acm.org" *Date: *Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 5:06 PM *To: *Noreen Whysel *Cc: *"peace@acm.org" , Bev Corwin , Justin Byrd , Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>, Isha Chhatwal , Jeff Brennan , Jorge Flores , wg-riup , Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>, Amanda Gay *Subject: *Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

Please think about the next doc without worrying much about the current one.

What needs to be said? ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:41 PM Noreen Whysel wrote:

No microchips! Haha. Maybe a wax seal with a QR code…

I actually almost started a conversation about legal issues but then deleted it. That would certainly have to be an updated version, as Tom says, if we want to get this through before Fall.

Noreen

On Aug 6, 2024, at 2:28 PM, Tom Jones wrote:

Yes, they are a challenge and I know of one.

What we need are not more problems to solve but more solutions to those problems.

For care facilities we can imagine a smartphone by the bed.

For others - can we imagine some means of tracking, like smart cards on a lanyard. We may need to go very intrusive and suggest a chip as we do for our loved pets.

Be the change you want to see in the world ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:48 AM Bev Corwin wrote:

PS FYI Please keep in mind that not all wards of state have guardians, and research is limited about wards of state without guardians and all other support services, it varies state to state, some report from14% to 84%, so there are many wards of state without anyone to help them with IDs, verification, authentication, etc., and they need to be able to request accommodation. They may not have housing, healthcare, a guardian, social worker, nor anyone to help them.

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:03 PM Justin Byrd wrote:

Hi there,

I won't be able to make it to the meeting after all. I approve the document.

Vote: Yes.

Great work everyone!

-J

Get Outlook for iOS https://aka.ms/o0ukef

---

*Justin Byrd *(He, Him)

PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD

*E:* justin@machi-systems.com

*P:* *570-820-2060*

*M:* Book a call with me! https://meetings.machi-systems.com/justin

*Machi-Systems, LLC.*

Scranton Life Building

*538 Biden St, Suite 528*

*Scranton, PA 18503*

machi-systems.com |

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*Scope Agreement: We will consider this issue resolved when we are able to answer your query, or we will inform you if the issue will be out of scope.*

This message (including any attachments) may contain CONFIDENTIAL information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

------------------------------

*From:* Bev Corwin *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino ; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *Subject:* Re: [WG-RIUP] Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed!

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones wrote:

Noreen - unfortunately in health situations the rights are determined (in the US) at a local gov't level. The job of this document has, here-to-fore been focused on the technical requirements of digital identifiers, not on existing legal terms, which have been implicitly accepted as de jure. We could expand the scope of the document if we want to spend more time - or we could publish what we have and then determine what is needed for a new version. ..tom

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:03 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

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 < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 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 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 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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

_______________________________________________ A Community Group mailing list of KantaraInitiative.org WG-RIUP mailing list -- wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org List archives -- https://mailman.kantarainitiative.org/hyperkitty/list/wg-riup@kantarainitiat... ______ Group wiki -- https://kantara.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/WG-RIUP

Yes, and there should always be a way to request accommodation On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:34 AM Salvatore D'Agostino wrote:

Agree fully about the need to have an understanding of trust X BEFORE whatever that may be.

In most cases this requires some kind of notice.

*From:* Tom Jones *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 1:42 AM *To:* Noreen Whysel *Cc:* jim kragh ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *Subject:* Re: RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.

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 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 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 *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett ; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn ; Bev Corwin ; Isha Chhatwal ; Thomas Sullivan ; Jeff Brennan ; Justin Byrd ; Jorge Flores ; wg-riup ; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay *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 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

Kantara RIUP WG Digital Identifier Inclusion Draft 9 5 15 24_ENDORSED.docx https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jaY6yNopxCFC_3sBgeddnmM1psVkLmnS/edit?usp=sharing_eil_m&rtpof=true&sd=true&ts=6693d6ef