RIUP WG 'brief' meeting tomorrow to vote on revisions to the Digital Identifier Inclusion doc.
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 2193Passcode: 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>
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 <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 2193Passcode: 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, 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <kragh65@gmail.com <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 <nwhysel@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 10:20 PM To: kragh65@gmail.com Cc: ThomasClinganJones@gmail.com; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org> 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com <mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com <mailto:kragh65@gmail.com> > Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com <mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com> >; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com <mailto:sal@idmachines.com> >; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com <mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com> >; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com <mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> >; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com <mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com> >; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com <mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com> >; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net <mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net> >; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com <mailto:justin@machi-systems.com> >; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io <mailto:jorge@entidad.io> >; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> >; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org> >; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org <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 <kragh65@gmail.com <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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>
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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
Agree with Tom! If an individual is within arms reach of an ER, they can walk in and be engaged in some manner. We are not talking about that type of encounter. If an individual does not have a credential he/she needs someone to vouch for them. That may be a faith based entity, a local not for profit, a social or healthcare worker, and that has worked here in central Florida and Miami. Tom, I like the idea you just shared with Noreen. ...... we can discuss on the call. and reference the call here are several call in #'s that Amanda shared with me: Join Zoom Meeting https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87605872193?pwd=HQI7AJKhLvpgtUxKyOYANVUKzsZW3U.1 Meeting ID: 876 0587 2193 Passcode: 157149 --- One tap mobile +13052241968,,87605872193#,,,,*157149# US +13092053325,,87605872193#,,,,*157149# US --- Dial by your location • +1 305 224 1968 US • +1 309 205 3325 US • +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) • +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) • +1 646 931 3860 US • +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 11:57 AM Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> wrote:
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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
Wrt Tom, yes technically From: Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM To: peace@acm.org Cc: Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com <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 <nwhysel@gmail.com <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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com <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 <nwhysel@gmail.com <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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com <mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com <mailto:kragh65@gmail.com> > Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com <mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com> >; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com <mailto:sal@idmachines.com> >; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com <mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com> >; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com <mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> >; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com <mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com> >; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com <mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com> >; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net <mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net> >; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com <mailto:justin@machi-systems.com> >; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io <mailto:jorge@entidad.io> >; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> >; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org> >; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org <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 <kragh65@gmail.com <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
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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
Awesome, thank you for the clarification, Agreed! On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tom Jones <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
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<mailto: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<https://machi-systems.com/> | [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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM To: peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> Cc: Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>> wrote: Wrt Tom, yes technically From: Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com<mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com>> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM To: peace@acm.org<mailto:peace@acm.org> Cc: Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com<mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com>>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com<mailto:kragh65@gmail.com>>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com<mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com<mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com>>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com<mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com>>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net<mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com<mailto:justin@machi-systems.com>>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io<mailto:jorge@entidad.io>>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org>>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <nwhysel@gmail.com<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <nwhysel@gmail.com<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com<mailto:kragh65@gmail.com>> Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com<mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com>>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com<mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com<mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com>>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com<mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com>>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com<mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com>>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net<mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com<mailto:justin@machi-systems.com>>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io<mailto:jorge@entidad.io>>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org>>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org<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 <kragh65@gmail.com<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.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<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org<mailto: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 <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 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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
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 <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 <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 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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
I guess you missed my common sense solution - human in the loop On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 2:28 PM Tom Jones <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 <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 <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 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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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.jpeg>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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.jpeg>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan < jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
~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<mailto: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<https://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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> Reply-To: "peace@acm.org" <peace@acm.org> Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 5:06 PM To: Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com> Cc: "peace@acm.org" <peace@acm.org>, Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>, Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>, Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>, Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>, Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>, Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>, wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>, Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>, Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org> 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 <nwhysel@gmail.com<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com<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 <justin@machi-systems.com<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 iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> --- Justin Byrd (He, Him) PARTNER / PROJECT-LEAD E: justin@machi-systems.com<mailto: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<https://machi-systems.com/> | <Image.jpeg> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com<mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com>> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM To: peace@acm.org<mailto:peace@acm.org> <peace@acm.org<mailto:peace@acm.org>> Cc: Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com<mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com<mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com>>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net<mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com<mailto:justin@machi-systems.com>>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io<mailto:jorge@entidad.io>>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org>>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>> wrote: Wrt Tom, yes technically From: Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com<mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com>> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM To: peace@acm.org<mailto:peace@acm.org> Cc: Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com<mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com>>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com<mailto:kragh65@gmail.com>>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com<mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com<mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com>>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com<mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com>>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net<mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com<mailto:justin@machi-systems.com>>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io<mailto:jorge@entidad.io>>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org>>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <nwhysel@gmail.com<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<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 <nwhysel@gmail.com<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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com<mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com<mailto:kragh65@gmail.com>> Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com<mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com>>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com<mailto:sal@idmachines.com>>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com<mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com>>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com<mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com>>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com<mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com>>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com<mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com>>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net<mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com<mailto:justin@machi-systems.com>>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io<mailto:jorge@entidad.io>>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org>>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org<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 <kragh65@gmail.com<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.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<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org<mailto: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<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org<mailto: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<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org<mailto: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<mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> To unsubscribe send an email to staff@kantarainitiative.org<mailto: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 <nwhysel@gmail.com> 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/diy-digid/> web.archive.org <https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06/diy-digid/>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06/diy-digid/> <https://web.archive.org/web/20150922085743/http://blaserco.com/blogs/2003/06/diy-digid/>
Noreen
On Aug 6, 2024, at 6:31 PM, Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com> 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 |
*<image001.png>*
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Reply-To: *"peace@acm.org" <peace@acm.org> *Date: *Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 5:06 PM *To: *Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com> *Cc: *"peace@acm.org" <peace@acm.org>, Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>, Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>, Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>, Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>, Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>, Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>, wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>, Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>, Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org> *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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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.jpeg>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*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 <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:37:10 PM *To:* peace@acm.org <peace@acm.org> *Cc:* Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd < justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup < wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <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 <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 <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
Wrt Tom, yes technically
*From:* Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 11:48 AM *To:* peace@acm.org *Cc:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com>; jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn < salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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 <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 <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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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
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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 1:42 AM To: Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com> Cc: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org> 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 <nwhysel@gmail.com <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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com <mailto:thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM To: jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com <mailto:kragh65@gmail.com> > Cc: Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com <mailto:nwhysel@gmail.com> >; Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com <mailto:sal@idmachines.com> >; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com <mailto:salcorn@easydynamics.com> >; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com <mailto:bevcorwin@gmail.com> >; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com <mailto:ichhatwa@gmail.com> >; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com <mailto:tsullivan@drfirst.com> >; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net <mailto:jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net> >; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com <mailto:justin@machi-systems.com> >; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io <mailto:jorge@entidad.io> >; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org> >; Kay Chopard Cohen <kay@kantarainitiative.org <mailto:kay@kantarainitiative.org> >; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org <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 <kragh65@gmail.com <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, and there should always be a way to request accommodation On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:34 AM Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com> 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 1:42 AM *To:* Noreen Whysel <nwhysel@gmail.com> *Cc:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; Amanda Gay <amanda@kantarainitiative.org> *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 <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 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 <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2024 8:41 PM *To:* jim kragh <kragh65@gmail.com> *Cc:* Noreen Whysel. Brett <nwhysel@gmail.com>; Salvatore D'Agostino < sal@idmachines.com>; Simone Alcorn <salcorn@easydynamics.com>; Bev Corwin <bevcorwin@gmail.com>; Isha Chhatwal <ichhatwa@gmail.com>; Thomas Sullivan <tsullivan@drfirst.com>; Jeff Brennan <jeff_brennan@sbcglobal.net>; Justin Byrd <justin@machi-systems.com>; Jorge Flores <jorge@entidad.io>; wg-riup <wg-riup@kantarainitiative.org>; Kay Chopard Cohen < kay@kantarainitiative.org>; 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 <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
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>
participants (7)
-
Bev Corwin -
jim kragh -
Justin Byrd -
kragh65＠gmail.com
-
Noreen Whysel -
Salvatore D'Agostino -
Tom Jones