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

DID Documents as self-signed Verifiable Claims #61

Closed
kimdhamilton opened this issue Jul 22, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

DID Documents as self-signed Verifiable Claims #61

kimdhamilton opened this issue Jul 22, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@kimdhamilton
Copy link
Contributor

From @ChristopherA on June 30, 2017 7:20

The current DID implementors spec for DIDs just has the DDO being a signed JSON-LD blob.

I've always been inclined that instead it should be a self-signed verifiable claim, pointing to itself. This may be a minor point but that is the way I've always thought of the trusted root ever since the days of Ronald Rivest's SDSI.

I believe this is what @msporny and @dlongley are doing with their DDO method. Can you guys share what your DDO looks like?

Copied from original issue: WebOfTrustInfo/btcr-hackathon-2017#8

@kimdhamilton
Copy link
Contributor Author

From @msporny on July 17, 2017 1:10

It's exactly as @ChristopherA says, but keep in mind that our DDO implementation is going on 2+ years old at this point. Here's an example of a DDO for our current system:

https://demo.authorization.io/dids/did:2ba2d687-2f92-4c4a-aa45-e3e8a6ae38a1

We'll be revamping it over the next couple of months to align w/ the new DID spec. We expect to suggest changes to DDO objects.

To be clear, a DDO can be thought of as an Entity Profile (from Verifiable Claims). That is, it's a signed document that can contain a set of Credentials (which contain Verifiable Claims).

@kimdhamilton
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ChristopherA which repo should we move this to?

@kimdhamilton
Copy link
Contributor Author

From @ChristopherA on July 18, 2017 1:18

I our prototype, ddo fragment /0 is signed by the blockchain itself (in our case, bitcoin) which points to the next fragment (in our case, through the op_return), and the /1 is a self-signed claim that adds claims about the entity that issued the did. Fragment /1+ could contain more claims, either issued by the did issuer, or accepted from others about the did issuer that the issue accepts.

@dlongley
Copy link
Contributor

Link to some of my other comments on this issue: #59 (comment)

@kimdhamilton
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think this issue is out of date (and should be closed). It's not clear it introduces any new/unknown requirements for Entity Profiles, which is the concept we were looking for when we opened the issue.

@msporny msporny changed the title DDOs as self-signed Verifiable Claims DID Documents as self-signed Verifiable Claims Jan 11, 2018
@dlongley
Copy link
Contributor

I'm going to close this one out -- @kimdhamilton, if you prefer it reopened please do so.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants