Add a section on referencing or embedding external credentials. #51
Conversation
index.html
Outdated
| credentials are issued by the same entity, the verifier has a high level | ||
| of trust and confidence in the issuer's security and auditing mechanisms, and | ||
| the value of the credentials is sufficiently low. However, this is not | ||
| recommended, and goes against the philosophy of <a>verifiable credentials</a>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I disagree. It does not go against the philosophy of VCs. Please delete the whole section starting with However, this is not.....
The referenced credential may be just as valid as the referencing credential since tampering with either will normally be just as difficult for an attacker.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A large part of the purpose of Verifiable Credentials (the verifiable part) is that they contain tamper-evident mechanisms like digital signatures.
The thing about linking to external credentials is that the digital signature on the content of one of them (without an equivalent mechanism in the link itself) will give users a fall sense of security, since they may assume (incorrectly) that the signature also somehow binds or protects the content of the other credential.
To put it another way, if you're not cryptographically binding the contents of the other credential, why use a verifiable credential in the first place? Why not use a regular one?
The example given of just simply using a foreign key (like referencing a PO Number for an Invoice credential), that's very commonly done, I agree. But it's done in use cases where there's a very low threat of tampering, in which case, why use a verifiable credential at all?
| <a>verifiable credential</a> is to use a linking mechanism that | ||
| cryptographically binds the contents of the target document to the URI itself. | ||
| One way to accomplish this would be to use <a>hashlinks</a> or an equivalent | ||
| URI scheme. Another mechanism would be to encode the full contents of the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dont see the point in encoding the full contents, especially if the issuer is the same for both credentials. I suggest deleting the section starting Another mechanism
Addresses issue #4.
Preview | Diff