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

Use case for Holder Binding #129

Closed
wants to merge 13 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

justAnIdentity
Copy link

@justAnIdentity justAnIdentity commented Jan 31, 2023

@awoie
Copy link

awoie commented Jan 31, 2023

potentially fixes #128

index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
@justAnIdentity
Copy link
Author

Thank you for the suggestions @TallTed !

@brentzundel brentzundel changed the title Fix for Issue #128 Use case for Holder Binding Feb 3, 2023
@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

Sakurann commented Feb 3, 2023

I understand this use-case but maybe refactor it to a use-case when a user is getting government benefits. that is much more high stake without holder binding and is very real - millions if not billion was stolen in tax monely because there was no holder binding for people geting covid benefits from the govenrment.

@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented Feb 6, 2023

millions if not billion was stolen in tax monely because there was no holder binding for people geting covid benefits from the govenrment

What was the Credential that was not bound to its (or any) Holder, that was used for such theft?

I think it is inarguable that there were a lot of problems with the various programs that distributed [US] government funds to businesses and individuals, and these included dispersals to recipients who were not intended as well as forgiveness of loans which should not have been forgiven if even lent ... but I do not believe these issues could accurately be described as a "lack of holder binding".

@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

Sakurann commented Feb 6, 2023

If user A can get user B's monetary benefit by impersonating user B, that's the problem and with proper holder binding in place, it becomes much harder.

My whole point was, can we use a bit more high stake use case? that's it.

@justAnIdentity
Copy link
Author

@Sakurann . The main aim was to keep things simple and illustrate the concept of holder binding. I'm happy enough to accommodate your request for a higher stakes use case though. How about a cross-border tax-filing use case?

Copy link
Contributor

@Sakurann Sakurann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

there are enough approvals, I am ok with the current example - we can do another update PR later.

@jandrieu jandrieu self-assigned this Feb 7, 2023
Copy link
Member

@msporny msporny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Speaking as an organization that has created a national digital age verification system for the United States (TruAge - run by the National Association of Convenience Stores -- 149,000 retail locations across the US), most variations of holder binding is specifically viewed as an anti-pattern for digital age verification systems.

Could we update this use case to be a higher risk use case, where holder binding might be less likely to raise privacy concerns, such as "boarding an airplane" or "crossing a border"?

@vongohren
Copy link

Speaking as an organization that has created a national digital age verification system for the United States (TruAge - run by the National Association of Convenience Stores -- 149,000 retail locations across the US), most variations of holder binding is specifically viewed as an anti-pattern for digital age verification systems.

Could we update this use case to be a higher risk use case, where holder binding might be less likely to raise privacy concerns, such as "boarding an airplane" or "crossing a border"?

Are there any good inspiration from this paper? https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot11-the-hague/blob/master/final-documents/identifier-binding.md

It used to have the airplane case in it, but we removed it because it got complicated with multiple different cases

Copy link
Member

@TallTed TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor fixes

index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
justAnIdentity and others added 8 commits February 16, 2023 15:21
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
@justAnIdentity
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the language check once more @TallTed .
@msporny , see if this use case is better to your liking

@KDean-GS1
Copy link
Collaborator

@jandrieu and I have reviewed the request. This is closely aligned with International Travel with Minor and Upgrade and ask that the existing use case be enhanced rather than a new one be created.

@jandrieu
Copy link
Collaborator

@KDean-GS1 Reviewed this again today. Because it is so close to an existing use case, we don't feel it illustrates enough new usage.

We are marking this pending closed and will close it if we don't have further engagement.

However, we are open to suggestions for improving the 5.3 International Travel with Minor and Upgrade to better address the coverage you are looking for.

@jandrieu
Copy link
Collaborator

Closing.

This has been pending closed for two weeks with no further engagement since the Feb 24 request to reframe this as an update to the existing use case.

We still welcome suggestions for 5.3 International Travel with Minor and Upgrade if that does not fully cover the details desired in this PR.

@jandrieu jandrieu closed this Apr 28, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

10 participants