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

Linkage with Terminology of DAA draft #2

Open
ericvoit opened this issue Dec 6, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Linkage with Terminology of DAA draft #2

ericvoit opened this issue Dec 6, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@ericvoit
Copy link
Collaborator

ericvoit commented Dec 6, 2021

Ned asserts that specific wording appears to conflict with other adopted drafts. E.g., Section 2.1 – Non-reputable Identity Evidence and subsequent use of ‘non-reputable’ in the context of identifying the Attester or an Attesting Environment. Given a DAA key as Attesting Environment identity, the objective is to allow reputable Attester instance identity but non-reputable Attester class identity. Eric responded that in DAA, perhaps the term DAA credential should be formally defined. What DAA says now is "Attestation Evidence SHOULD be cryptographically associated with an identity document that is a randomised DAA credential." Additionally, perhaps the "Attester Identity ('attesterIdentity')" principle in Section 5 should be refined to "Anonymous Attester Identity"? In any case, DAA seems to have a more narrow definition of identity than draft-voit-rats-attestation-results. In this draft, the non-reputable class itself be considered a form of identity. So I think the intent of both sets of text don't conflict, even if we don't have all the terms right. Also draft-voit-rats-attestation-results could easily import terms like "Anonymous Attester Identity" from DAA as being a valid form of identity. Having the group being identified is quite useful.

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

1 participant