Skip to content
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

clarify relationship to the proof property and the specifications defining how to secure VCs #1312

Closed
Sakurann opened this issue Oct 7, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

Sakurann commented Oct 7, 2023

from the issue #1285

4.9 Securing Verifiable Credentials

I don't see anywhere that tells a verifier to check the securing mechanism before trusting the content.

Could this section say to look up the proof's type in a registry, and use the specification found there to determine whether the credential was provably provided by a trusted issuer?

This section should mention that the "proof" property is a graph container … except in https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-integrity/#verify-proof, I don't see any expectation that there's a graph on either side of the "proof" property, so I'm not sure it actually should be.

Clarifying the relationship to the proof property and the specifications defining how to secure VCs should address these questions.

@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sakurann commented Oct 7, 2023

this section should be renamed from 4.9 Securing VCs to 4.9 Proof.

@iherman
Copy link
Member

iherman commented Nov 1, 2023

This issue should be covered by #1326: it does give a precise set of statements, in terms of graphs, of what proof covers for VCs and VPs.

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Jan 6, 2024

PRs #1326, #1338, #1389, #1394, #1403 have been merged. Each PR partially address this issue, but together they fully address the issue. Closing.

@msporny msporny closed this as completed Jan 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants