-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Topic Paper: Owned vs. Unowned Claims and Self-Sovereign Identity #1
Comments
kimdhamilton
added a commit
to kimdhamilton/rebooting-the-web-of-trust-fall2017
that referenced
this issue
Jul 10, 2017
Adding @nsmolenski's topic submission from WebOfTrustInfo#1
kimdhamilton
added a commit
to kimdhamilton/rebooting-the-web-of-trust-fall2017
that referenced
this issue
Jul 10, 2017
Adding @nsmolenski's topic submission from WebOfTrustInfo#1
added in PR #3 |
shannona
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 10, 2017
Adding @nsmolenski's topic submission from #1
shannona
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 10, 2017
Adding @nsmolenski's topic submission from #1
ChristopherA
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 11, 2017
Merge pull request #91 from brentzundel/master
jandrieu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 19, 2018
Addressed typos in Amira doc and regenerated odf and pdf files.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Owned vs. Unowned Claims and Self-Sovereign Identity
Natalie Smolenski
Cultural Anthropologist and Business Development
Learning Machine
When Christopher Allen presented ten principles of self-sovereign identity for community discussion, he listed “Control” as the second principle. He described it as follows:
The distinction here between owned and unowned claims is important, and how they are both managed will be key to functional implementations of self-sovereign identity.
The term “self-sovereign” has been catching on as of late, and has been used to describe instances of digital identity (government-controlled digital passports, the internet of things) which are clearly not self-sovereign. This confusion stems in part from difficulties individuals have understanding the difference between claim ownership vs. claim sharing and verification. Yet this distinction is one on which the future of individual privacy and autonomy depends.
Claims made about individuals by other parties already proliferate and will continue to proliferate with blockchain technologies as well. Yet as the pseudonymous transactional structure of chains becomes increasingly tied to digital identities, the danger is that the blockchain could become the infrastructure for a regime of control unprecedented in human history. There is no reason, in principle, why individuals could not become objects in a giant supply chain, tracked like commodities as they move and transact around the world. Participating in this tracking could become the precondition for access to all forms of tokenized resources—including government currencies, utilities, financial services, the ability to make purchases within certain jurisdictions, and basic rights and privileges.
In short, what began as the best attempt to date to preclude the momentous expansion of surveillance capitalism could end up becoming its apotheosis if we do not address early on the individual ability to manage not only claims about themselves that they own but claims they do not own. Obviously the two cases entail different sets of considerations, and this is why I suggest beginning discussion about them now.
Sources:
Christopher Allen, “The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity.” Life with Alacrity. April 26, 2016. http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: