├── LICENSE ├── README.md ├── agenda.md ├── agenda2020.md ├── agenda2021.md ├── agenda2022.md ├── assets ├── guest-slides │ ├── 20201209-van-Deventer,-Oskar__ESSIF-LAB+DIF-Interop.pdf │ ├── 2021-02-030-Markus-Sabadello-Overview-of-Multi-proof VCs.pdf │ ├── DIF-20210728.pdf │ └── readme.md ├── iiw31guide.md ├── interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pdf ├── interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pptx ├── interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-12-20.pdf ├── interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-4-20.pdf ├── interoperability-mapping-exercise-9-30-20.pdf ├── readme.md ├── slides--2021-02-17--t_ronda_(SecureKey)-did-orb-spec-tour.pdf ├── ssi-architectural-stack--and--community-efforts-overview.pdf └── wallet-matrix.md ├── docs ├── InteropProject.png ├── README.md ├── _config.yml ├── chapi │ ├── favicon.ico │ ├── index.html │ ├── install.js │ ├── wallet-ui-receive.html │ ├── wallet-ui-store.html │ └── worker.html ├── endorsements.md └── explainer.md ├── documentation.md └── parking-lot.md /LICENSE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Apache License 2 | Version 2.0, January 2004 3 | http://www.apache.org/licenses/ 4 | 5 | TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION 6 | 7 | 1. Definitions. 8 | 9 | "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction, 10 | and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document. 11 | 12 | "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by 13 | the copyright owner that is granting the License. 14 | 15 | "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all 16 | other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common 17 | control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition, 18 | "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the 19 | direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or 20 | otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the 21 | outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity. 22 | 23 | "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity 24 | exercising permissions granted by this License. 25 | 26 | "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications, 27 | including but not limited to software source code, documentation 28 | source, and configuration files. 29 | 30 | "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical 31 | transformation or translation of a Source form, including but 32 | not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation, 33 | and conversions to other media types. 34 | 35 | "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or 36 | Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a 37 | copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work 38 | (an example is provided in the Appendix below). 39 | 40 | "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object 41 | form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the 42 | editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications 43 | represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes 44 | of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain 45 | separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, 46 | the Work and Derivative Works thereof. 47 | 48 | "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including 49 | the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions 50 | to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally 51 | submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner 52 | or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of 53 | the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" 54 | means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent 55 | to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to 56 | communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, 57 | and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the 58 | Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but 59 | excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise 60 | designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution." 61 | 62 | "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity 63 | on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and 64 | subsequently incorporated within the Work. 65 | 66 | 2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of 67 | this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, 68 | worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable 69 | copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, 70 | publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the 71 | Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. 72 | 73 | 3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of 74 | this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, 75 | worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable 76 | (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, 77 | use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, 78 | where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable 79 | by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their 80 | Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) 81 | with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You 82 | institute patent litigation against any entity (including a 83 | cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work 84 | or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct 85 | or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses 86 | granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate 87 | as of the date such litigation is filed. 88 | 89 | 4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the 90 | Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without 91 | modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You 92 | meet the following conditions: 93 | 94 | (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or 95 | Derivative Works a copy of this License; and 96 | 97 | (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices 98 | stating that You changed the files; and 99 | 100 | (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works 101 | that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and 102 | attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, 103 | excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of 104 | the Derivative Works; and 105 | 106 | (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its 107 | distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must 108 | include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained 109 | within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not 110 | pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one 111 | of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed 112 | as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or 113 | documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, 114 | within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and 115 | wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents 116 | of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and 117 | do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution 118 | notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside 119 | or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided 120 | that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed 121 | as modifying the License. 122 | 123 | You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and 124 | may provide additional or different license terms and conditions 125 | for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or 126 | for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use, 127 | reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with 128 | the conditions stated in this License. 129 | 130 | 5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, 131 | any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work 132 | by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of 133 | this License, without any additional terms or conditions. 134 | Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify 135 | the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed 136 | with Licensor regarding such Contributions. 137 | 138 | 6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade 139 | names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, 140 | except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the 141 | origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file. 142 | 143 | 7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or 144 | agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each 145 | Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, 146 | WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or 147 | implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions 148 | of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A 149 | PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the 150 | appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any 151 | risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License. 152 | 153 | 8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory, 154 | whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise, 155 | unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly 156 | negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be 157 | liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special, 158 | incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a 159 | result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the 160 | Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill, 161 | work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all 162 | other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor 163 | has been advised of the possibility of such damages. 164 | 165 | 9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing 166 | the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer, 167 | and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity, 168 | or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this 169 | License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only 170 | on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf 171 | of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify, 172 | defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability 173 | incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason 174 | of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability. 175 | 176 | END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS 177 | 178 | APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work. 179 | 180 | To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following 181 | boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]" 182 | replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include 183 | the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate 184 | comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a 185 | file or class name and description of purpose be included on the 186 | same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier 187 | identification within third-party archives. 188 | 189 | Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] 190 | 191 | Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); 192 | you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. 193 | You may obtain a copy of the License at 194 | 195 | http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 196 | 197 | Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software 198 | distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, 199 | WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. 200 | See the License for the specific language governing permissions and 201 | limitations under the License. 202 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /README.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Interoperability Project 2 | 3 | A project to demonstrate continuous technical demonstration of interoperability between DID Methods, Wallets, Agents, Encrypted Data Vaults, and Verifiable Credentials. 4 | 5 | The project consists of a series of tools and web applications. 6 | 7 | - [Meeting page/agendas](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/agenda.md) 8 | - [Meeting recordings](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wgccmMvIImx30qVE9GhRKWWv3vmL2ZyUauuKx3IfRmA/edit#gid=2146749098) 9 | 10 | ## [Explainer](./docs/explainer.md) 11 | 12 | This group is primarily a "project management" group, working to educate across communities and minimize redundant or wasted work. We strive to be a welcoming place for people new to the space to get up to speed on what's happening elsewhere, as well as for insider and specialists to report out about cutting-edge development, particularly the most relevant work happening *outside* of DIF. 13 | 14 | We keep a running bibliography of input documents [on our Notion](https://www.notion.so/dif/be6763341a014d248f655aea187d7890?v=c9ac48a07f3d411c9a1bea32b55f7e76). To suggestion additions or updates, please open a new github issue. If it is uncontroversial, we may unceremoniously close your issue after updating the notion. 15 | 16 | Our [agenda](agenda.md) is stored here in github-- please edit it in hackmd to propose future agenda items, and/or open issues for broader agenda questions. 17 | 18 | ## [Endorsements](./docs/endorsements.md) 19 | 20 | ## [Projects](./projects) 21 | 22 | - Ongoing educational curation of DIF [youtube channel](https://studio.youtube.com/channel/UCicZIzvOXOyij0A6jlA7nxQ?c=UCicZIzvOXOyij0A6jlA7nxQ) 23 | - [VC Spec Map](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/vc-spec-map), created, researched and maintained by independent researcher Michael Ruminer 24 | - Ongoing [bibliography](https://www.notion.so/dif/be6763341a014d248f655aea187d7890?v=c9ac48a07f3d411c9a1bea32b55f7e76) of input documents and references 25 | 26 | ## Minor Deliverables 27 | 28 | Open to pull requests and issues if you spot factual errors or significant omissions! 29 | 30 | | Name | Description | status/version | most recent link | date | 31 | |---|---|---|---|---| 32 | |---|STRAWMEN/ONGOING|---| 33 | |Wallet Cred Format Matrix| A high-level survey of "wallets" and wallet-link things, showing their current and roadmapped credential-type support as a simple markdown matrix | ongoing / crowdsource (hackmd still open)| [hackmd](https://hackmd.io/t1cotiReTXCnkpDG8k2tVA) | oct 24 2020 | 34 | |---|VERSIONED|---| 35 | |Interop Targets (essay)| An overview of the multi-polar terrain of interoperability test suites and harnesses | 1/2 |[dif blog](https://blog.identity.foundation/setting-interoperability-targets/)|Q1 2021| 36 | |Map (pdf)| A drilled-down map of all the varieties of components used in a core set of decentralized identity applications known to the group|v0.0.9|[github pdf](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/blob/master/assets/crosscommunity-architecture-survey-oct-2020.pdf)| oct 24 2020| 37 | |Map (pdf)| A simplified graphic interpretation of the above, used for planning purposes in a German Schaufenster project and submitted by a member |v0.0.9|[github pdf](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/assets/interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pdf)| nov 2020| 38 | |Map (whimsical)|Same as above, except in editable and commentable (DIF-controlled) Whimsical diagram|v0.0.9|[whimsical](https://whimsical.com/CUhk3dT4RUZvGa4Lt7rNvD)|sept 2020| 39 | |Map Familiarity Survey| A self-assesment for members to express their general familiarity or conceptual understanding of all the items on v0.0.9 of the map above|v0.0.9|[hoolie survey]((https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ohv_40BFVXc9uVfESJawu9O0UrXxfI60j_QkBYjukUg/edit?usp=drive_web))|Oct 2020| 40 | |Map Familiarity Survey results analysis| Infographic showing relative high and low points for familiarity of the core group (24 responses)|v0.0.9|[github PDF](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/blob/master/assets/crosscommunity-architecture-familiarity-survey-result-oct-2020.pdf)|Oct 2020| 41 | |SSI 101 #iiw31 Slides (PDF)| Karyl Fowler's and Juan Caballero's pitch deck from SSI101 session at #IIW31| v1 (exhibited at conference)| [github PDF](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/blob/master/assets/knowledge-base--october-2020.pdf)| oct 24 2020 | 42 | |SSI 101 #iiw31 Recording (Youtube)| Video of Karyl Fowler's and Juan Caballero's full session, including Q&A, from SSI101 session at #IIW31| v1 (exhibited at conference)| [youtube](https://youtu.be/DaM0UtQTLCs)| oct 24 2020 | 43 | |Architectural Stack & Community Efforts overview (aka "the three stacks diagram")| Rouven Heck's interpretation of the spec landscape mapped onto layers 1-3 of the ToIP mental model, across the W3C-centric, Hyperledger, and DIF communities. |v1| [github (PDF)](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/blob/master/assets/ssi-architectural-stack--and--community-efforts-overview.pdf)|Sept 2020| 44 | 45 | 46 | ## Related DIF Work 47 | 48 | - [Papers](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/papers) 49 | - [DID Auth JOSE](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/did-auth-jose) 50 | - [Universal Resolver](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/universal-resolver) 51 | 52 | ## Mailing List 53 | 54 | Please join the mailing list by sending an email to: InteropProject+subscribe@dif.groups.io 55 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /agenda.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Interoperability WG Rolling Agenda & Minutes 2 | 3 | [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw/badge)](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw) 4 | 5 | [DIF Website][dif] | 6 | [*GitHub repo & Issues*][repo] | 7 | [Mailing list][maillist] | 8 | [Reference shelf][reference] | 9 | [Potential future topics][parking-lot] 10 | 11 | ## Join the call! 12 | The Interoperability Working Group meets every 2 weeks via Zoom: 13 | 14 | [Join 0800PDT/1700CET/2200ICT call][eu-zoom] | 15 | [Visualization of timezones](https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20210802T150000&p1=37&p2=224&p3=179&p4=220&p5=56&p6=44&p7=28&p8=240&p9=22) 16 | 17 | [Meeting recordings][recordings] 18 | 19 | _For this call, you are encouraged to turn your video on. This is a good way to build rapport given we are a large, disparate group with constant new members._ 20 | 21 | _This document is live-edited DURING each call for minutes, while a stable copy lives on our [GitHub repo][repo]. Feel free to propose agenda items either via issues or by messaging on DIF Slack._ 22 | 23 | ## November 2, 2022 24 | 25 | ### Announcements 26 | 27 | - We now meet every other week 28 | - No meeting in two weeks (Nov. 16) due to IIW 29 | 30 | ### Introductions 31 | 32 | ### Agenda 33 | 34 | - Peter Langenkamp presenting about a cluster of interoperabilty centered on TNO EASSI. 35 | - https://eassi.ssi-lab.nl/ 36 | - https://eassi.ssi-lab.nl/docs/about 37 | 38 | Transcript: 39 | 40 | [Introductions] 41 | 42 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Hello, sorry to be slightly late. Welcome Peter. 43 | 44 | Peter Lagenkamp: Thanks 45 | 46 | Kaliya Identity Woman: To have you here and we've got a good group so far. Hi Rueben. 47 | 48 | Reuben Bailon: Hey Kaliya, how are you? 49 | 50 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Good to see you. 51 | 52 | Reuben Bailon: Good to see you too. 53 | 54 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Um,so,we're recording already? Great.Um, and Brent is here. 55 | 56 | Brent Shambaugh: [inaudible] 57 | 58 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Daniel is off because it is his wife's birthday. Um, so um, we haven't met for awhile or at least, I haven't been on a call for awhile. I think we had a call to go over the results of the [hand guesture] the survey we did 59 | and actually this call and Peter's presentation are a result of the survey because we asked about clusters of interoperability, uh, and we found one, we didn'tm I didn't really know about and we asked the the one of the folks that was [inaudible]...part for leading 60 | that cluster at TNO to come and present. That's out main, um, activity today. But I also just because we are trying, um, working on being inclusive good communities, um, wanted to open the floor up if there was somebody who is new the call who wanted to introduce 61 | themselves and just say hi to other folks, do that first before Peter presented. 62 | 63 | Frank Hinek: Yeah, I'll say hi. Uhm, Frank Hinek and uh, I've just recently joined the team at TBD to work on the product and platform strategy. working closely with Daneil Buchner who I think some of you guys know 64 | 65 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Great. 66 | 67 | Frank Hinek: And, uh, looking forward to the content today. 68 | 69 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Yep. 70 | 71 | Jorge Flores: I'll jump in. Good morning everyone. I'm Jorge Flores, cofounder of Entidad. We're a benefits coorportation working in the non-profit space, uh, specifically working on a farmworker ecosystem use case. I presented a couple of days ago, at the uh, 72 | open wallet foundation architecture task force and look forward to,uh, being a little more involved in this community. 73 | 74 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Great, thanks so much Jorge. Anyone else? Um, everyone else I know, so, okay Peter love to have you share about what you guys have been doing about your interoperability 75 | 76 | Peter Lagenkamp: 77 | Okay well. First of all, thank you for the invite. I am Peter Lagenkamp, I work at TNO. For those unfamiliar, TNO is the Netherlands organization for applied scientific reasearch. It's an organization of about three thousand employees active in all kinds of 78 | different fields. But, we've got a unit ICT, and within that department that also concerns themselves with self-soverign identity, and that is a topic that I work on. The other topic being secure multi-party computation. 79 | One of the things that we have worked on at TNO, is something that we like to call an SSI Wallet Gateway. I will explain what it is over the course of this short presentation. I met Kaliya at IIW, I may have seen some of you there as well. 80 | For those who were there, I also had a session at IIW about this topic [1]. So let's see if I can't share my screen. Okay, You should be able to see my screen now. 81 | 82 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Yep. 83 | Limari Navarrete (DIF): Yep. 84 | 85 | Peter Lagenkamp: 86 | TNO EASSI - An SSI Wallet Gateway. SSI as a service. What is this all about? I can skip over a couple of the first slides probably because you are all working in this field. SSI is a different way of sharing data compared to the normal way of sharing data, where the 87 | person is in the central position, so organizations don't communicate about that person, but via that person. Information is exchanged via the person's wallet, on their phone for example. And as you all know SSI is still a work in progress, a lot of standardization 88 | efforts going on with the DIF, W3C, and other efforts. Focus on different layers of the stack, from wallets on the bottom all the way to issuing and verifying at the top. With Indentifiers, credential types, credential formats, proofs, APIs & Communication Protocols 89 | in between. So, if we focus on the bottom of this stack, the wallets, we can see that there are quite a few different types of siloes available to us. So if you go to the app store and search for IRMA, there is also Jolocom, uPort, Evernym, and many many more. 90 | And as you all probably know, if you go to a conference related to SSI, you're very likely to encounter a new wallet that you've never heard of before. This can lead to problems. So, in this picture on the left it's Albert Heijn, a supermarket in the netherlands. 91 | 92 | Suppose the want to hire a new employee. They need some information about the employee from the municipality, that the person lives in. And in this case, the municipality of Groningen. Groningen has issued some information to the IRMA wallet of that person, and 93 | Albert Heijn can request that information from the IRMA wallet of the future employee, to check the information. Wonderful, very easy, but now suppose there is another employee, and that employee lives in the municipality of the Hague, and Hague has decided to use 94 | Hyperledger Indy based wallet. Now Albert Heijn would also have to support that type of wallet ... and there are many different protocols of course. So how will this work in the future? Will we have all of these parallel options available, or will we get one 95 | single standard to rule them all? So will we get the equivalent of VHS, or will we have all sorts of similar solutions like document formats? Well, we saw this as a potential problem, cause there is no such standard yet, and we decided to take some inspiration 96 | for the payment service provider model. So if you have a web shop, and you want your customers to be able to pay, you don't care if they use Paypal, if they use a credit card, a ban transfer, as long as the money gets your way of course. You also don't want to 97 | deal with the hastle of having to implementing a credit card payment yourself and figuring out how to communicate with the PayPal API, and all of the different methods available there. 98 | 99 | Instead you can go to one of the payment service providers, will take care of all that work for you. So you can simply redirect your customer to a payment portal, and the customer can select the payment method of their choice. So what we want to do is build equivalent, 100 | but for SSI. 101 | 102 | So in this picture we have the supermarket on the left, the municipality on the right, the customers, the holders on the bottom, and they have different wallets available to them. And then there is the gateway, which we dubbed EASSI. 103 | 104 | So our solution, SSI Gateway, with the aim of making it easier for verifiers and issuers to support a wide variety of wallets, and also taking care of any potential breaking updates that may occur. So if one wallet is updated, then not every issuer of verifier 105 | will have to go through the trouble of figuring out how to make this work. It is just the SSI service provider that will have to figure out how to make this work. And everything else should stay the same for the issuer and the verifier. The holder should have the 106 | benefit of being able to use their perferred wallet, as long as the wallet meets certain criteria from the issuer and the verifier then the holder should otherwise be free to make their own choice based on maybe the user interface or some other quality of life 107 | differences between wallets. And, well here at the bottom you can see an image of a demo that we built for the flex industry. It's , what's the English term..companies that send employees to other companies to help out. 108 | 109 | Kaliya Identity Woman: A temporary worker. 110 | 111 | Peter Lagenkamp: 112 | Thank you. Yes. And if they want to register a new employee there, they migh need to check the identity of the person first. They can click the check indentity button, and they will be redirected to a portal where they can select the wallet that they perfer to use. 113 | And once they select their preferred option, they will from that point onward have to deal with the standard flow for that specific wallet. 114 | 115 | To make this work we have this schematic. The top there is the business layer, so that is the web shop equivalent. They have different credential types, credential schemas between them, that they might want to issue or verify. At the bottom there is the different 116 | wallets that exist. In the orange block that is the SSI Wallet Gateway where we try to offer an easy to use as possible API to the business. And there is some generic stuff happening of course, and there's connectors to those different protocols that exist. 117 | Our service is completely agnostic to the ways that the different wallets might work. Everything specific about those wallets is implemented in the connector layer. And as long as it is possible for someone to handle the, write the code for issuing or verifying from and to 118 | and to that wallet themselves they should in principle should also be able to build a connector for this service. 119 | 120 | Of course we cannot just connect to, build connections for specific wallets. You could also envision connectors for presentation exchange and similar solutions. 121 | 122 | I think an e-mail was sent to all of you in preparation of this meeting with a link included on this slide [2], but I also will be sharing these slides after the meeting. This is our main page (https://eassi.ssi-lab.nl) explaining what out main idea is all about. 123 | It has links to documentation of the service, a demo instance of the service, and all of the code is available open source on GitHub (https://github.com/tno-ssi-lab) where we've used docker and docker compose to make it as easy as possible to run your own instance 124 | of this service should you want to do so. 125 | 126 | Once you have this service up and running, or if you decide to use the demo service hosted by us, there is four different steps One is registration, two is definition of specific credential definitions, and then there is the credential mapping, So the wallet specific 127 | credential defintion could be a password credential for Trinsic specifically, a password credential specifically for Jolocom. Then the credential mapping is basically telling the service if we're talking about a password credential we need either a password 128 | credential for Trinsic or this password credential for Jolocom. Once this mapping is done, then you can start issueing and verifying credentials through this service. 129 | 130 | And finally there is two links here. One to the demo service (https://service.ssi-lab.nl/utils) and one to the bare bones demonstator for issueing and verifying of a name credential (https://namecredential.demos.ssi-lab.nl/) Currently my name, but I am planning an 131 | update so anyone can issue their own name. 132 | 133 | Kaliya Identity Woman: That's great. Uh. Cool. So a couple questions. I'll open it up to anyone who wants to ask questions please raise your hand. So this set of tools you built. Is it, um, it's open source? 134 | 135 | Peter Lagenkamp: Yes it is. 136 | 137 | Kaliya Identity Woman: That's excellent. And then it is really designed so that a grocery store or a potential employer. They can leverage SSI but they don't have to get into a wallet war, if the wallet that the people that they are interacting with is in the 138 | code base. Like if the connector is in the code base. 139 | 140 | Peter Lagenkamp: Exactly, that's the basic idea. We want to ensure that having to pick a wallet won't be an issue, a um, something preventing someone from getting into the game of using SSI. So we, when talking to different companies that had heard about SSI we 141 | often got questions, which wallet should we use. 142 | 143 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Right 144 | 145 | Peter Lagenkamp: Should we be using, and that shouldn't be the main concern for many of those companies. Certainly not yet, and maybe not ever. We really want them to get started using SSI. Whether they are using Trinsic. Whether they are using Estaus. Well, 146 | there are many different possibilties. We don't want that to be prohibiting. 147 | 148 | Kaliya Identity Woman: So how much uptake have you seen. Is this being provided as a com ... like it's one thing to have open source code. It's another thing to run it in production. Are there folks commercializing this running in production? 149 | 150 | Peter Lagenkamp: No. No. No. No, we're not at stage of production yet. That also has something to do with the nature of TNO. So I breifly, uh, mentioned that we are involved in lots of different fields but I forgot to mention that TNO is a very specific position 151 | here, and that's TNO was founded by Dutch law about 90 years ago..basically to bridge the gap between academia and business. So once something becomes too applied for academia but still too theoretical for business that's where TNO was supposed to step in.. 152 | to help innovation. 153 | 154 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Yeah. 155 | 156 | Peter Lagenkamp: And that means that TNO does not usually go beyond the proof of concept in building something. Then we hope that some other company will continue this work, or sometimes we do these projects directly for a company. In the case of TNO EASSI, 157 | we've gone a bit beyond what we normally do and we are currently also looking into finding other, yeah, parties interested in developing this further. 158 | 159 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Cool, so it is sort of in that phase now. You've done your job. You're hoping.. 160 | 161 | Peter Lagenkamp: Yeah, that's mostly it but since we're still in the game of SSI we with some regularity use our own service for different projects where we just want to issue or verify using a wallet and having this service has saved out buts on a couple of occasions. 162 | because, with SSI still being relatively new it can be that a specific wallet you're relying on doesn't work at the exact time you're giving a demonstration and then we are able to simply switch to using a different wallet. 163 | 164 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Got it. All right. Okay. Are there other, other questions for Peter? 165 | 166 | Jorge Flores: Hi Peter. You can just clarify, I'm (inaudable) Is the choice here that is being offered from the perspective of the issuer and the verifier organization and not necessarily, the uh, the end user? 167 | 168 | Peter Lagenkamp: Yes. Exactly. Yeah, so, some people who have heard me talk about this are reminded of a different effort that seems a bit similar and that is polyfill CHAPI, I don't know if you've heard about that. 169 | 170 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Yeah. 171 | 172 | Peter Lagenkamp: Polyfill allows a user, once they want to issue a verifiable credential to select the wallet that they want to use. But the caveat is the issuer and the verifier still have to do all of the implementations in order to support the different 173 | wallets that the user might select. And, we're basically on the other end, so um, maybe a cooperation between what we've build and what polyfill CHAPI is working on would be interesting. 174 | 175 | Kaliya Identity Woman: You know, I think. Have you spoken to Manu? 176 | 177 | Peter Lagenkamp: Yes I have. I have a meeting with the people from CHAPI a couple of weeks ago. 178 | 179 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Okay, great. Yay, that's what I love to hear. Keith. 180 | 181 | Keith Kowal: Thanks for the presentation Peter. I think what strikes me is you're kind of acting. You're literally acting as a middle man service between wallets and issuers and verifiers, and that would seem to...I mean I'm just trying to go through my mind 182 | how that would work with a lot of different trust architectures, right? Because I am not trusting that I am talking to the issuer or verifier. I'm trusting that I am talking to you as the middle man. Because, you're the one doing, you know, checking of revocation 183 | status, checking signatures, I'm guessing by default because there are such huge differences and other prot... other standards that you probably have to do all of that heavy lifting. So how can I trust that maybe you have fake verifier pretending to be somebody. 184 | You know, so much of the trust architecture is that I as the holder am directly communicating with the verifier, and how do you see that working when you have a middle man service like yourself? 185 | 186 | Peter Lagenkamp: Uh, well as I, as I mentioned.We do have the service running and you can try to use it for yourself, but it is also possible for anyone. Any issuer or verifier to run their own instance of the service. So you don't have this problem of the middle man. 187 | That's made possible by all of the code being open source. Um, it would also, what we also want to look into further into whether it is possible to have a service run by a middle man but in such a way that middle man does not have any access to the data being 188 | exchanged. 189 | 190 | Keith Kowal: Okay. 191 | 192 | Kaliya Identity Woman: And then Daniel. 193 | 194 | Daniel Bachenheimer: True, this is really cool. Yeah, so I was thinking some more, but then when you said it was all open source. Okay, so the idea is then to, you know for, um, for a solution provider to use your open source code as kind of middle ware so that 195 | um, it's not necessarily interoperable but it's middle ware so that then you could deal with a uPort or a Jolocom, uh, wallet. So I get that, but um the, and I'm thinking of okay, what about, um, Zero Knowledge Proofs, and all of these, um, bits that we want to use SSI 196 | for, selective disclosure, and how is that um, portrayed to the individual, and I think the answer is, that is that you would pick one wallet over the other based on it's capabilities. Right? 197 | 198 | Peter Lagenkamp: Right, but usually it would be the um, the verifier in this case, making that choice right? And so, in these credential mappings that I mentioned, um, the issuer and the verifier are free to include, uh, the wallets that they want to include. 199 | So if we only want to offer, um, um, certain wallets as an option to the user we can, and ideally the choice is simply based on the actual features supported by that wallet and not just, uh, us liking particular people working at a specific wallet organization of course. 200 | But if you go to one of the demos that we have here [flexSSI prototype slide] The top link allows us to register using out passport, and we have a check identity button, and now we see all five options that we currently support. Jolocom, IRMA, Esatus, Datakeeper, 201 | and Trinsic. But, if we go back and we have a different workflow. Here we wanted to show the use of selective disclosure, and wanted to share some skills. Let's see here. For this demo the verifier had opted to only, uh, accept credentials from Estatus and Trinsic, cause 202 | those were the only two wallets at the time that supported the features required. 203 | 204 | Daniel Bachenheimer: Interesting, Okay. Then we here with the European Digital Identity Wallet, um, uh, it wants, um, to support, let's say traditional SSI but also mDL. Have you looked at, um, doing anything, uh, with the ISO mDL? 205 | 206 | Peter Lagenkamp: Un, no I haven't. Let me take a note. Have a look later now. I haven't at the moment. Well I did mention our project is agnostic to the ways that wallets,uh, work. In principle, A wallet does not have to be based on SSI. Uh, in principle you could 207 | [inaudible] use the service to exchange json formatted data, just plain JSON formatted payloads. So, not not to, I don't know much about the mDL specifically, but I imagine it would be possible to support that as well. 208 | 209 | Daniel Bachenheimer: Right. Interesting. Okay. And then the other things that the European Digital Identity Wallet specifies, at least in its draft. Because it's like, Um, high level of assurance [inaudable] high to authenticate to the wallet itself. So before I could even exchange. 210 | I know that you are a middle tier layer so it's probably outside of you, the scope of this project but you know when they, the Europeans contemplated wallet it's more than what an Aries wallet is. You know they're talking about some user interface. Some um, uh, means to 211 | authenticate to the wallet things like that. But that's out of scope for your current thinking I would presume, right? 212 | 213 | Peter Lagenkamp: Um, I think it is, but um, but not entirely. Sure. 214 | 215 | Daniel Bachenheimer: Okay, Sam is saying that that's not necessarily out of scope for an Aries Wallet, but [inaudible] 216 | 217 | Sam Curren: No, it's definately part of it. The, um, the, something that is not really approached in scope at all is like payment coordination stuff that is being contemplated by the Open Wallet Foundation. So, that really hasn't been in scope at all. But as far 218 | as presenting credentials, connecting, authenticating, that's all, that's all within scope. 219 | 220 | Daniel Bachenheimer: Okay cool yeah. Maybe we'll talk, have a chance to talk about that more at IIW. Especially the different levels of assurance associated with authentication. Cause that's going to be key, yeah to various business use cases. 221 | 222 | Sam Curren: Totally, and I suspect that the presence of the open wallet foundation and the community will have lots of conversations at IIW about wallets generally speaking. So, it's going to be {inaudabile}. 223 | 224 | Daniel Bachenheimer: Yeah, Good. Good. 225 | 226 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Geat, um. Keith, but is this a new question? 227 | 228 | Keith Kowal: Yes. 229 | 230 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Great. [laughing] Sometimes people don't put their hands down. Go ahead. 231 | 232 | Keith Kowal: This is more of an open question for the group. I guess.I mean, I think it is really interesting your approach. Because when I think about, I do want an ecosystem where there's lots of wallets, but I kind of think of it as in the web3 context. There's 233 | Ethereum, and I can download a plethora of wallets to manage my Ethereum account, right. And they all kind of work on a similar standard. I guess my view has always been that at country levels, and at regional levels, yes, we do hope to see a plethora of wallets, 234 | but those wallets are going to support pretty unified SSI standard, whatever that is. Like, maybe that's AnonCreds, Maybe that's JSON-LD with BBS+. Doesn't matter. I think this vision is saying, er, I know we are in early days., but I think wht you are suggesting is 235 | cause it is not just a plethora of wallets because each wallet supports a unique tech stack underneath it. Sometimes interoperable. Sometimes extremely custom, um, or botique. So, um, I. If we take a country like the Netherlands Peter, like what's your vision of how 236 | SSI will develop in the Netherlands? Do you think there will be a plethora of wallets, each supported their own standards. This issuer in the Netherlands is issuing out in this format. this issuer in the Netherlands is issuing in this format, or do you think over time 237 | in the Netherlands they'll be like a unified standard, but yet a plethora of wallets? 238 | 239 | Peter Lagenkamp: Well it's hard to say for certain of course, but um, the Netherlands isn't typically, uh, in a position to force other countries to adhere to standards the we would prefer. Uh, We're very much dependent on trade with other countries for example. Um and 240 | even if it is the case within the Netherlands that we would chose to use a specific wallet for interactions with, um, with businesses and government within the Netherlands. As soon as we would want to interact with a country outside the Netherlands, be it a country 241 | close by like Germany or a country further away like the U.S. or China we also want to be able to interact with those wallets of course. 242 | 243 | Keith Kowal: Yes, I agree. I think that's where this type of service would be very useful is when you go... I mean again we're in a future world, who knows. But Like when you get into troughs outside of regional standards when you want to interact. Then I this will, 244 | I mean this kind of stuff would be definately needed. 245 | 246 | Peter Lagenkamp:And also, uh, with the European rules, that they're currently working on. Every country will be mandated have, tsupport at least one wallet, uh, but there is no guarantee that all those European wallets will be based on the same technolgy stack. 247 | On the other hand, bank, uh, will have to accept wallets from any of those European countries. 248 | 249 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Got it. Interesting. So, um, do you have any companies that are, well maybe you can't tell us this, or maybe you don't even know cause it's open source code. Like are their companies trying to productize this? 250 | 251 | Peter Lagenkamp: Um, uh, we have spoken to companies that might be interested, uh, none that I am aware of that have gone so far to actually act upon this further than, uh, inquiry and looking it. Uh, we have worked together with a couple of companies, that have, uh, 252 | used the service for proof of concept, proof of value within their company. 253 | 254 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Cool. That's great. Okay cool. Um, is there, in terms of, I'm just curious, in terms of developing this code did TNO do it or did you define, um, what you wanted and hire someone to do it? It's just kind of a curiousity about how these things 255 | get done cause Open Wallet is trying to figure out how it gets stuff done, and so.. 256 | 257 | Peter Lagenkamp: No, I think this was done in house, um, some of the connectors, um, were built in context with the company behind that wallet. Uh, so for Jolocom, for Jolocom for example, we uh, were in touch with Jolocom on a fairly regular basis. Also was a bit 258 | of pressure on getting that finished because of a hackathon we were involved in. Um, but uh, others, others were, uh, yeah, built solely based on the documentation provided by that [inaudible]. 259 | 260 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Right. Um. And then. It sounds. I mean it's interesting. It seems a little bit like you are a compliment to the universal resolver. Like you were universal get it in the wallet and get it out of the wallet tool. Right. 261 | 262 | Peter Lagenkamp: Mm hmm. 263 | 264 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Do you see the potential for this experience [inaudible] to define like a common VC-API out of it. Like are there a lot of similarities between how all of the different projects do it and there is an opportunity for alignment or is it they do 265 | things quite differently? 266 | 267 | Peter Lagenkamp: Yeah, so, uh, of course, uh, there's many similarities, uh, between these wallets. Because, they all want achieve a very similar, uh, goal, and, uh, they are all aware of the verifiable credential standard, So there's many, many similarities. Uh, we did come 268 | we did come across a couple of, um, I would call it striking differences as well in how some of the details were implemented, But uh, overall I would say there is many more similarities than differences I would say. 269 | 270 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Okay great. Um. Are you or someone from your team. Oh, Keith has a question, go ahead. 271 | 272 | Keith Kowal: Yeah, On the technical differences like how did you deal with ...I am always very curious ... so if you have a wallet let's say that has no concept of pairwise DIDs and then you want to communicate with an issuer or verifier that is AnonCreds and it needs a pair 273 | wise DID...like to me those kind of differences always stood out as kind of being a technical challenge, because the wallet itself doesn't know what a pair-wise DID is, can't persist it, and yet you need that for the [inaudible] issuer or verifier [inaudible]. So It seems like you would 274 | almost have to persist the pair-wise DID in your service. I am just using this as an example of where, that's where things can get complicated where you have wallets that don't understand the fundamental thing that is needed by the issuer or verifier, but I wondered 275 | if you ran into that. 276 | 277 | Peter Lagenkamp: Uh. Well, not, not really. But um. Yeah, In principle we can at least support the functionality offered by a different wallet if we want to extend that functionality beyond what that wallet by itself offers, we might run into those issues and in 278 | worst case scenario we can simply say certain use cases you can't use this specific wallet ...because the technology isn't up to par. 279 | 280 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Interesting. 281 | 282 | Peter Lagenkamp: And I think, ah okay. 283 | 284 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Yeah, Um. Any other questions for Peter? Um, I'm looking on the chat. Okay. Great, Are you going to be at IIW Peter? 285 | 286 | Peter Lagenkamp: No, unfortunately not. Not for a second time this year. 287 | 288 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Okay, great well. Is someone coming from TNO? 289 | 290 | Peter Lagenkamp: No, I'm afraid not. We've um pretty much used all of our uh confrence ... 291 | 292 | Kaliya Identity Woman: [laughing..inaudible] 293 | 294 | Peter Lagenkamp: for this year 295 | 296 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Well in happy news. I don't know, I'm coming..I'm going to be in Brussels for the N..NGI, um, sort of presentation set of things so maybe I will see you there. And thanks everybody for joining us today and we have our next call 297 | on November 30th with Paul Knowles presenting about the Overlay Capture Architecture. And we are, um, looking for our...you know you can always ping us if you have ideas or suggestions um so, let us know. Thanks everybody. 298 | 299 | Peter Lagenkamp: [inaudible] Thanks for your attention everyone. 300 | 301 | Kaliya Identity Woman: Alright. 302 | 303 | Limari Navarrete (DIF): Thank you. bye. 304 | 305 | Peter Lagenkamp: Bye. 306 | 307 | ## Upcoming meetings 308 | 309 | - November 16, 2022 - NO MEETING (IIW) 310 | - November 30, 2022 - OCA with Paul Knowles (Human Colossus Foundation) 311 | - https://bit.ly/3FhT38G 312 | 313 | --- 314 | 315 | ## Past Meetings 316 | 317 | ### October 19, 2022 318 | 319 | #### Announcements 320 | 321 | - We now meet every other week 322 | - [Human Colossus Foundation releases OCA v1.0 specification](https://humancolossus.foundation/blog/oca-v1-launch) 323 | 324 | #### Introductions 325 | 326 | #### Agenda 327 | 328 | - Hello from the New Chairs! Brent Shambaugh & Daniel Bluhm 329 | - Review Survey on Interop so far 330 | - [Slide Deck](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1lRxa49ZJjrSiWx-4ldLAwWvin5wukenEIXjK5Rj9l24/edit?usp=sharing) 331 | - Get Community Input on what the Interop group should do this "year" (the one that aligns with the school year) 332 | 333 | Survey Feedback: 334 | 335 | - Insights into who participated would be interesting. (We've since added a field for leaving an email). 336 | 337 | Rough minutes from the Discussion and other Suggestions: 338 | 339 | - Find the pockets of interop 340 | - Which companies interop with what other companies; build bridges between the pockets 341 | - Interop testing 342 | - Don't boil the ocean. Start with small targets. Let the question "what are we trying to accomplish with interop?" guide the targets. 343 | - Interested in a public assessment framework. 344 | - Bonnie Yau of IDLab mentioned they're working on a framework, starting from (or modelled after) the Aries Agent Test Harness. 345 | - Approaches to Localization 346 | - BC Gov gave a demo of a localized wallet app with credential localization using OCA. (Link to demo pending) 347 | - Other approaches? 348 | - What does "interoperable" mean to different communities? 349 | - Often gets thrown around in marketing jargon but what are some real metrics for defining whether something is "interoperable?" 350 | - Wallet UX 351 | - There might be some other working groups focused on UX already. There might be some overlap with interop. 352 | 353 | 354 | ### 5th of October 2022 - EU Time 355 | 356 | - Announcements 357 | - Interop Survey: https://forms.gle/4YqrjFcB5Fnbcrgz8 358 | - Decoupling AnonCreds from Hyperledger Indy and creating extensible resources on-ledger with DID URLs by Ankur Banerjee 359 | - Wanted to support primatives of both AnonCreds and other credential format. 360 | - Found that this was relevant not only for AnonCreds primatives but other resources as well. 361 | - Centralized services (like schema.org) are a single point of failure. 362 | - "Linkrot" breaks links on the web all the time. 363 | - Decentralized resources are tamper-evident and censorship resistant. 364 | - Types of resources that benefit from being on-ledger 365 | - Schemas 366 | - Overlay Capture Architecture 367 | - Revocation Registries (whether W3C revocation lists or AnonCreds) 368 | - Logos and other brand elements 369 | - How do we solve the problem? 370 | - DID Spec allows for paths 371 | - DID URLs to resources stored on ledger 372 | - Resources signed by DID 373 | - Demo of Animo + Cheqd using AnonCreds resources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QILE98VMwZw 374 | - CLI Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkAJe2ayaJU 375 | - Blog post: https://cheqd.io/blog/anoncreds-indy-pendence-1 376 | - DID URLs discussion on TOIP wiki: https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/DID+URLs+for+Digital+Resources+Specification 377 | - More info on Cheqd: https://learn.cheqd.io/overview/cheqd-101 378 | 379 | ### 15th of June 2022 - EU Time 380 | Andrew Hughes comes for a round two, EU friendly time and talks about MDL and the work he is doing for that standard. He was very active during IIW April 2022 and had some great sessions on MDL then. Lets hope we can discuss much of the outcome of those sessions 381 | 382 | https://lists.identity.foundation/g/interop-wg/message/148 383 | 384 | #### Notes 385 | Notes doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWZrxDVYeXMjZEevgcll5KUA-R-sCJ_NusTY3WXSEIk/edit#bookmark=id.ooi00xbr9col 386 | 387 | ### 8th of June 2022 - US Time 388 | Andrew Hughes comes and talks about MDL and the work he is doing for that standard. He was very active during IIW April 2022 and had some great sessions on MDL then. Lets hope we can discuss much of the outcome of those sessions 389 | 390 | Note docs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWZrxDVYeXMjZEevgcll5KUA-R-sCJ_NusTY3WXSEIk/edit#bookmark=id.mm2zhc120mad 391 | 392 | ### 1st of June 2022 - EU Time 393 | [Validated ID](https://www.validatedid.com/) comes and presents to us what it means to be EBSI conformant. We discuss how this is aiding interoperability 394 | https://ec.europa.eu/digital-building-blocks/wikis/display/EBSI/Become+conformant# 395 | 396 | ### 25th of May 2022 - US Time 397 | Cancelled 398 | ### 18th of May 2022 - EU Time 399 | Cancelled 400 | ### 11th of May 2022 - US Time 401 | Cancelled 402 | 403 | ### 4th of May 2022 - EU Time 404 | IIW recap on interoperability, roundtable style to review what everyone joined in on 405 | 406 | We need to socialize the new meeting format for DID Com Usergroup happening on Discord. Invite: https://discord.gg/eNN4Wns6Jb 407 | Format: https://hackmd.io/@dhh1128/Sk5_Gb2J9 408 | Mailing list: https://lists.identity.foundation/g/didcomm-usergroup 409 | 410 | ### 27th of April 2022 - EU Time 411 | Cancelled due to IIW focus 412 | 413 | ### 20th of April 2022 - EU Time (NOTICE EU TIME) 414 | Cancelled due to issues with time changes 415 | 416 | 417 | ### 13th of April 2022 - EU Time 418 | CCG Roadmap discussion part 2 419 | 420 | ### 6th of April 2022 - US Time 421 | CCG Roadmap discussion - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wgccmMvIImx30qVE9GhRKWWv3vmL2ZyUauuKx3IfRmA/edit#gid=2146749098&range=B99 422 | ### 30th of March 2022 - EU Time 423 | Missunderstanding of responsibilities and time frames, this meeting was cancelled 424 | 425 | 426 | ### 23rd of March 2022 - US Time 427 | Trust Alliance New Zealand - https://trustalliance.co.nz/ 428 | Who are they, how do they support the ecosystem in a good way and what are their view on interoperability 429 | 430 | ### 16th of March 2022 - EU Time 431 | Timezone issues created a bunch of confusion, so we rescheduled 432 | 433 | ### 9th of March 2022 - US Time 434 | CANCELLED 435 | 436 | ### 23rd of Feburary 2022 - US Time 437 | CANCELLED, join the DIF F2F Meeting -https://www.eventbrite.com/e/difcon-f2f-virtual-3-tickets-162786327287 438 | ### 16th of Feburary 2022 - EU Time 439 | CANCELLED 440 | ### 9th of Feburary 2022 - US Time 441 | Bob Blakely is coming to share with us an reflection of the SAML interop work. So we can learn from history 442 | ### 2nd of February 2022 - EU Time 443 | QR Code part 2, see agenda 8th of december for context 444 | ### 26th of January 2022 - US Time 445 | 446 | ### 19th of January 2022 - EU Time 447 | We will have a new year kickstart discussion. Revolving recent interop movements happening the last couple of months. 448 | 449 | Preparing us for real interop for IIW 34 - April 26th-28th 450 | 451 | Our perspective on potential interop targets: 452 | We believe that it could be possible to have interop testing around JSON-LD ZKP with BBS+. 453 | We are also interested in interop around exchange protocols and seee WACI-PEX as haveing a lot of potential as the exchange protocol as it was designed to bridge between the Aries world and SVIP world. 454 | ***Lets discuss both these proposisions.*** 455 | 456 | 457 | We believe test suites should be built, how? 458 | 459 | What is needed to get to JSON-LD ZKP with BBS+ interop? Where are they bottle necks? What are the key groups that are or will be working on key parts. 460 | 461 | What is needed to get to WACI-PEX interop?Where are they bottle necks? What are the key groups that are or will be working on key parts. 462 | 463 | ### Scope 464 | * WACIPex 465 | * JSON-LD 466 | * ZKP with BBS+ 467 | 468 | #### Summary 469 | Profile of interoperability, it has been used alot of before to land something acknowledgeble. 470 | Profile are useful to drive interoperability to a flexible spec that can drive things forward. 471 | WACIPex is a profile 472 | 473 | What other profiles to others have? 474 | German community says it is a bit complex question. Issues with BBS+ signatures as of today. 475 | 476 | AIP Interoperability Testing: https://aries-interop.info/ 477 | AIP profile v1.0: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/tree/main/concepts/0302-aries-interop-profile#aries-interop-profile-version-10 478 | AIP profile v1.0: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/tree/main/concepts/0302-aries-interop-profile#aries-interop-profile-version-20 479 | 480 | See recording and chat for further intro 481 | 482 | 483 | 484 | ### NEW YEAR BREAK - 12th of January 2022 485 | ### CHRISTMAS BREAK - 5th of January 2022 486 | ### CHRISTMAS BREAK - 29th of December 487 | ### CHRISTMAS BREAK - 22th of December 488 | 489 | ### Agenda - 15 Dec - US time 490 | Transmute and Karyl comes and talks about what are the interop views they are selling to investors to 491 | We are inviting Transmute with Karyl to talk about their last funding round to discuss how investors are triggering on their case and what level of interop is sold to the investors. 492 | They will join and sharing that journey with us in the scope of how interop is valuable, it would be great! 493 | 494 | ### Agenda - 8 Dec - EU time 495 | Slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ki2VMtW1yZnWlomyeoYCIfrkLhb2Qb7Kb5sNQOiLYnY/edit#slide=id.p 496 | 497 | Dmitri Zagidulin will come and start discussion a common QR-code initiation. See where that shall go and how it can work 498 | 499 | QR code limitations are starting to drop of. Thanks to certain events we recently had and technology improvements. 500 | 501 | Size limitation is still there 502 | 503 | 4 ways to share a credential VP, depending on if it is offline or online. Is it an either or, or can we switch between them. 504 | 505 | Microsoft introduces some new potential ways of looking at sharing, and will be shared after meeting. WebShareAPI, Microsoft Cable project - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ki2VMtW1yZnWlomyeoYCIfrkLhb2Qb7Kb5sNQOiLYnY/edit#slide=id.gf8d555be24_0_23 506 | 507 | #### Deeplinking 508 | Universal App linkes or custom protocol schema. We have two deeplinkg actors, iOS & Android. 509 | 510 | But there are multiple fallacies here, that comes down to the user on boarding. And how to make sure that we are protecting the user at the start, versus keeping it sleek. 511 | 512 | #### Option to consider 513 | 514 | 515 | ### Agenda - 1 Dec - US time 516 | Cancelled 517 | 518 | ### Agenda - 24 Nov - EU time 519 | Recording: https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/T56nah0ObZFk7J5eck4bu9A_qzJDvmGW7Ze9bgjsG_A8OJ2rnyedjkJqQAfXOUlB.yo0_Kyo0lUQ3e2Z4 520 | 521 | * We want to be able to be nimble but still showcase that this group provides value. The success criterias are great! 522 | * Review "charter" and make it lean to reflect a more agile form. In the sense that we cannot predefine what we are doing now. Because the ecosystem is everchanging and new players come in. 523 | * Showcase current action points and direction to go and get some discussions and thumbs up. 524 | 525 | ##### Summary 526 | Do we want to define an interop profile for the community? How do we attack this task? 527 | We want need a clearer map 528 | 529 | We have drafted a shorter cleaner version: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11EKZZ0sSqOrXmdtDEtts4OrIVtQRSLB8mA3VxFLFgEw/edit inspiration from the older one https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a01GQVtZB7tDVcm9avS8zuYPHQzEEDtTOEh4Bqu-8Bs/edit 530 | 531 | We will announce and get feedback from the mailing list and slack! 532 | 533 | ### Agenda - 17 Nov - US time 534 | EU meeting recap and action points from the outcom of that meeting 535 | 536 | ### Agenda - 10 Nov - EU time 537 | This week we are getting a visit from the German community and hear how they have gone about interop. This conversation started during IIW and has been pulled through to have a introduction in DIF interop, and see what we learn and take from their approach. This meeting is on Wednesday, 10th of November, Europe time 3PM. 538 | Have a look how that looks for your timezone here: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20211104T140000&p1=137&p2=179&p3=187&p4=44&p5=28&p6=22 539 | Or just add the DIF whole DIF calender to your calender: https://bit.ly/dif-calendar 540 | Look forward to seeing you there, I believe it is going to be a great introduction! 541 | 542 | Presentation from Hakan, Andreas and Eugene 543 | 544 | ### Questions 545 | More questsions was asked in the recording, have a look at that: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wgccmMvIImx30qVE9GhRKWWv3vmL2ZyUauuKx3IfRmA/edit#gid=2146749098&range=C82 546 | 547 | **Tests? How have you guys gone about it?** 548 | Not yet, but it is one of our next priorties. Taking inspiration from the Aries test harness and how that should and could work. 549 | 550 | 551 | **What is the core connector for interoperability?** 552 | One profile that works acrosss the consortias would help to begin with. Instead of multiple profiles that did not work together. 553 | 554 | **How does this work with EU initatives? Meaning all countries should deliver a wallet that is interoperable** 555 | Not afraid not exctied, very netural on what will happen. Look forward to see what is going to be in the toolbox. 556 | 557 | **The interoperability matrix they are working on** 558 | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R0Y4ec1KVYErkcEgC3Qww7VR4CsCY2Lv2Bt-gfryEdw/edit#gid=1316375328 559 | 560 | 561 | ### Agenda - 3 Nov - US time 562 | Rechartering, take inspiration from this: https://www.notion.so/dif/HOSPITALITY-TRAVEL-SIG-242105321e1747f8bce776bf634a55b3. Pr [this older PDF](https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/secure.notion-static.com/eb432fe8-da02-469e-aeb6-9affd920d646/DIF_HandT_SIG_overview.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAT73L2G45O3KS52Y5%2F20211101%2Fus-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20211101T141153Z&X-Amz-Expires=86400&X-Amz-Signature=75a7b9625d76d72b206d73249a79ea80f3afd06e6cf95928d37cc06dea783e1d&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&response-content-disposition=filename%20%3D%22DIF%2520HandT%2520SIG%2520overview.pdf%22). Since interop group is not IP protected and our current charter is just a draft: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a01GQVtZB7tDVcm9avS8zuYPHQzEEDtTOEh4Bqu-8Bs/edit 563 | 564 | Balaz proposed to rename the group to something else. (WG name is confusing for many companies as this group is not IPR protected) Lets hear from Balaz on what is thoughts are to get a better understanding. 565 | Suggestions are: Interoperability (X)Cross Community Group.(WG name is confusing for many companies as this group is not IPR protected) 566 | Where do we need to rename things? 567 | 568 | ### Questions 569 | How does it all fit into the other groups? The SIGs(Health and travel) and discussion groups(Africa and Asia)? 570 | IS this the place to build and discuss test infratructures for interop? 571 | 572 | ### Agenda - 27 Oct - EU time 573 | No agenda, cancelled 574 | 575 | ## Agenda - 20 Oct - US time 576 | Internet Identity Workshop Recap, with the focus on interoperability. Did anyone hear anything really cool about interoperability during IIW? Anything worth taking notice of? 577 | @DW (Ping Identity) - do you have a summary of what interests came up for the interop group? 578 | Talk abit about the future of library polooza if time allows. 579 | 580 | IIW Highlights 581 | Adrian: Two orthoganal axises - KERI - innovation and thought about security and privacy from an academic perspective but completely ignoring everything that has gone on for 6 years. 582 | DIDComm and relatives - that keep plowing ahead in a series of protocol decisions that are self referential. This is where at - now we just have to get to agree. 583 | Some people think we are already "done" KERI camp working from first principciples and do right. 584 | Noted they are not talking to each other. 585 | Darrell - premature interoperability premature standardization - we are not "there yet" which is why we see KERI 586 | DIDComm trying to align - governments taking Hyperledger Aries/Indy going to market. 587 | Interoperabiliy is not a term that is well defined. 588 | Overall good news - everyone agress we are heading in the right directions - How key rotation happens. Answer that happens in time. DIDComm world moves ahead - executable working code - those executing running along in the same direction. Describes why it is really messy. ([Lets find a link -to Darrell's session](https://continuumloop.s3.amazonaws.com/PrematureInterop-ContinuumLoop-Strategy-Standards-and-Interop.pdf)) 589 | 590 | Who is implementing KERI? - who is impelmenting - KERI is implementing - GLEIF 591 | - 592 | Sam: Seemed less rushed an panicy Fewer sessions that were more engaged in. Mike Ebert - opener question what proud of what afraid of. Where things are? Thinking a lot about IIW kinda used to be about Federated Identity - now about SSI the federated ID people less interested in the conversation. KERI - DIDComm not talking to each other - the appropriate form is to talk to each other in DIDs. Not opposed to KERI. Related - No one has throughly plugged them together. 593 | 594 | Vitorio talk on end of day 2. 595 | DIDComm - OpenIDConnect tension exists and draws out important things. 596 | What is it important that it draws out - do they realize the vision of DIDComm - bigger then passing credentials. Helps to draw out the assuptions people are starting with. 597 | A lot of things about identity - are things about people = credentials. Holders some times involved not always involved. Things about me - DIDComm is communicating "with me" not about me. Distiction about the two. 598 | Do I use DIDComm or do I use SIOP - not accurate to pit them against each other. They are in some areas - there is a lot of get along-ness and likely path to get along - can go from OIDC-SIOP -> to DIDComm connection. 599 | Todd: The last two IIWs I have attended fewer of technical sesisons - role not working with software developers- more to choose from on the non-technical philosphoical discussions. Try to listen closely to what people are saying one of the big challenges is adoption - and getting outside this community- good to see new people - they are very enthusiastic - how does it help everything move forward. A lot of technical barriers - Sam & Sam - understand the competing agendas of the various protocols - at the end of the day looking at the consumer side- who is going to be using it. Post listening to recordings. What do we need to we get the word out. 600 | 601 | ID2020 - felt that it was less technical then in the past. Looked at calendar and daily agendas. working with NGOs - very interesting - open to broader crowd. 602 | 603 | Adrian: Another impression - that the reality around SSI are actually to start to come to light. After a long period (2 years) of Kymbaya. Given by focus on DHS and closely related projects and interop from there. What I am seeing at this IIW and like 4-5 really key issues coming to light. 604 | 1) LD vs JWT -> seemed to have a collaborative solution. Driven by MSFT VCI. 605 | 606 | [Data Rights Protocol org](https://datarightsprotocol.org/) working with Sandy Pentland - building on JWTs 2nd genration identity. [YouTube ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xrBPmK3Oc98t8FzJCBMRE57Yl2JygJZds1pmydoHfCk/edit) 607 | 608 | 609 | They imagine - 7-8 different startups class of businesse act as service providers to consumer businesse that collect data - how are these service providers gonig to manage GDPR/CCPA data rights? approach from the commercial perspective - said from the beginning - they said there would be a 4th party involved where individual is proxied by an agent relative to a service provider (daza greenwood) working with credit unions and cooperative model and this includes it. 610 | 611 | 5 specific end points - Make this commercial offering - they can go to us as the service providers to verify identity of people and manage their data rights. 612 | 613 | Class of service providers selling B2B to and then - but they are there to offload the job of mandated to GDPR/CCPR around data rights that affect these businesses. In HealthCare we had this same thing service providers. MSFT build whole msft health strategy on it working properly. 614 | 615 | 2) Issue of Fedreation - OIDC google app/mozilla/apple formal objection to DIDs - peace is not made with federation 616 | 617 | 3) Trying to square verifiable data registries of various sorts - roll of private blockchains and role of hyperledger 618 | 619 | 4) custocial wallets/agents - Diwhala/Kiva - work with custocial wallets - seeing fragmentation. So much of what has been happening - every action is an authenitcation action like a FIDO-secure element - delegation to an agent - custodial wallets. "SSI we" has been living in tihs lala land of our own making having to face the market reality. 620 | 621 | Keith: hear about things about VCs being in production - I don't see it. Was on a call with an analyist. Am I missing something. People in production? 622 | Is there a big use-case that I'm missing. 623 | 624 | Adrian: VCs are clearly inevitable - what is not inevitable - is the subject identifeir and the schema's for VCs. That is why there is a duality between mDL and W3C standard track stuff. Education folks driving themselves nuts - running ragged - VC SSI model. What is driving them crazy - what they have done with Open Badges and tryign to include SSI standards into their market - where they service providers are institutions (and people) purity difficult to adopt Hyperldeger and DHS model. MSFT is fighting the good fight - they are in the identity hub/secure secure data storage - we have a band of catholicism that is not open to the relaities on the ground from the other perspective - IMSGlobal CLR - OpenBadges willingness to move towards VC model - we didn't want to be in a world where we are implementing all of the above. they will happen. 625 | How schema and subject identiifers. The most interesting move away from schema's towards types. I didn't see a lot of negativity. 626 | Who are the verifiers - them is us. They educational institutions accept credentials from other educational institutions. 627 | 628 | Guardianship - Signing relesases and getting inforamtoin directly from the institutions. They want the credentials directly from the instutions. They don't have the same prolem of "calling home" anything that complicates revocation. 629 | 630 | 631 | 632 | ## Agenda - 13 Oct - EU time 633 | No call due to [Internet Identity Workshop][iiw]. Look at notes for potential sessions. 634 | ## Agenda - 6 Oct - US time 635 | ### Items 636 | * Library polooza followup meeting 637 | * 5 min for IIW dicsussions, anything we need to discuss prepp for IIW 638 | 639 | ### More info 640 | 641 | #### Polooza 642 | 643 | The second-part followup to the “Library interop-polooza” discussion two weeks prior, which had participation from Aries, MATTR, Spruce and Veramo. 644 | 645 | Agenda working doc is here for history keepings: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wWl442DQK0dHhtL8HHsbdtbpMxRL-_mjCPpb3RDQo3M/edit# 646 | 647 | * Introductions 648 | * Stack diagram, any missing layers relevant to interoperability? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12_03m8QU1J0VaskBEnA97aUXz38kSTskvM7DwfSAPFg/edit#gid=0 649 | * How invested are people in getting interoperability? 650 | * What is the high level roadmap for interoperability? 651 | * Where do we start testing on this? 652 | * Can we carve out a small piece that everyone feel they have in place to start aligning interop? 653 | * Structured credential data model https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/788#issuecomment-896734277 654 | 655 | ![](https://i.imgur.com/XQpIBCr.png) 656 | 657 | 658 | #### IIW 659 | We should present the work going on and get more people to engange in this future work at IIW. So lets think about a session. 660 | 661 | How do we make sure this work differentiates from the whimsical diagram, or atleast stays up to date? https://whimsical.com/decentralized-mapping-exercise-clustered-LJJ1rizUQcYcL7MUwqWbTn 662 | 663 | # Previous meetings 664 | 665 | ## Agenda - 29 Sep - EU time 666 | Authentic Data & KERI and Certificate Transparency - Dave Huseby organized by Kaliya 667 | 668 | ## Agenda - 22 Sep - US time 669 | 670 | *Meeting postponed to a later date* 671 | 672 | The second-part followup to the "Library interop-polooza" discussion two weeks prior, which had participation from Aries, MATTR, Spruce and Veramo. 673 | 674 | follow up - Agenda worked on here. Will be posted when last comments are resolved: 675 | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wWl442DQK0dHhtL8HHsbdtbpMxRL-_mjCPpb3RDQo3M/edit# 676 | 677 | 1. Introductions 678 | 2. Stack diagram, any missing layers relevant to interoperability? 679 | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12_03m8QU1J0VaskBEnA97aUXz38kSTskvM7DwfSAPFg/edit#gid=0 680 | 3. Structured credential data model 681 | https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/788#issuecomment-896734277 682 | 4. How invested are people in getting interoperability? 683 | 5. What is the high level roadmap for interoperability? 684 | 6. Where do we start testing on this? 685 | 7. Can we carve out a small piece that everyone feel they have in place to start aligning interop? 686 | 687 | 688 | ## Agenda - 15 Sep - EU time 689 | 690 | Mozilla objection we talk about what that is, what are potential ways forward and what the DID WG thinks about this 691 | Brent Zundel comes and shares. 692 | 693 | The objection can be seen here: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2021Sep/0000.html 694 | ``` 695 | Why public vs private objection: Mozilla pressed the wrong button. 696 | Formal objections happen, and response should come from WG group chairs. 697 | Not requiring specific DID method: out of scope in charter from start. Compare to HTML img tag - no specific image format required 698 | Having DID document shows interoperability 699 | Divergence: comparison with 300+ URI schemes, 78 URN schemes 700 | But underlying common data format 701 | About centralization: Cannot define misuse of the technology. But have rubric to facilitate subjective evaluations. 702 | About multiple data formats (JSON, JSON-LD): potentially valid complaint, but inappropriate timing. We could have just picked one - the group had hours and hours of conversation about how to and whether or not to do it. Objectors could have raised this 8 months ago and we could have officially addressed it. Cannot do anything about it now except note the concern and apologize. 703 | Proof-of-work (PoW) blockchains vs. ethical web principals (EWP). EWP is great but not recommendation / normative guidance - don't reflect consensus of W3C and not part of the process - are a set of what one group thought were good ideas. They are indeed good ideas, but there is no requirement that we adhere to them. Encouraging low energy consumption, attacking existence of DID methods requiring on PoW blockchains. Assume PoW is a horrendous waste of energy: begins with statement as though it is fact, but a lot of people don't agree with it. Wanting the DID WG to make a formal position about all PoW blockchains and enforce that no PoW blockchains be allowed to support the back-end of a DID method... We can define the technology but not how people use it. That is assuming PoW is as bad as claimed. Complaint asks us to stick to a document that is not official. DID Spec does not require verifiable data registries, blockchains, distributed ledgers, Bitcoin, Proof of Work - not statements about these things. It's possible we could say you shouldn't do that - but the WG doesn't feel it would be appropriate to try to normatively define what a DID method is and isn't allowed to do - especially in light of the ongoing debate about PoW - if it is the only way to pay for the level of decentralization that some security stories call for. We would like to put something in out implementation guidance saying you should be aware of these concerns - but we may not be able to come to consensus on it. May be a red herring... some of the objectors in the past have publicly supported blockchains that use PoW. 704 | The public statement by Mozilla names other groups. Microsoft did not formally object to the specification - they joined the WG and were relatively active in it. You can't assume what the other formal objections were based on the contents of this one. But they do echo those points. There were three formal objections, all of which made the same sort of set of points. Mozilla's was the only one that they pushed the wrong button on. 705 | What to do: what DIF and ToIP have done: statement of support for decentralized identifiers. If people say "it's dead now", point out that it's not - has objections, ongoing debate. In our opinion, the objections don't have a leg to stand on. Combating the FUD. We'll just have to live in anxiety for a while. 706 | Snoore: Are there any anxiety-removing elements that one can do? 707 | Brent: not really. Process doc is explicit about there being no time limit on the director's deliberation. Call for Review for when we went to Proposed Recommendation ended. At that point, 3 formal objections had come in. Now we have this undefined period of time - takes s long as it needs to take - for the director to hear both sides, gather evidence, and learn about things. That process, unfortunately, takes a long time. We at the DID WG would really prefer if the director had gotten on the phone with us immmediately - and said, these objections are baseless and here are the reasons - we really would have liked that, and it would have been done. I hope in next few weeks, chairs of the WG will get to meet with the director. Then we'll find a time when we can all meet with the director, and hopefully get a decision. THis is probably going to take at least another month, and it's going to be uncomfortable. We can reflect on the fact that process-wise, we have done everything we were supposed to - and we can back that up with documents. Not much else we can do. 708 | Snoore: Hours of talk on this point...? 709 | Brent: The JSON-LD one. Our actually only official face-to-face (F2F) meeting was in Amsterdam. It was January 2020. The bulk of conversation was around how to deal with these two very similar but subtly different representations of a DID document. The conversations that we had while in Amsterdam were what gave birth to the "abstract data model" that we introduced in to the specification - which for a time gave birth to the idea of serializing into CBOR. Unfortunately, the CBOR serialization wasn't able to mature well enough to end up inside the spec - but it was there for months. Not a conversation we have had, but a conversation that if the objectors felt was really important to have, they could have jumped in and had it with us. 710 | Snoore: Other questions? 711 | Kaliya: You are responding with a lot of process points, which I agree with , but is there also responses about the technical - not just about the process - that are actually trying to rebut the technical things they are saying? 712 | Brent: We do have some. With the requirement that we normatively define a number of DID methods, apart from being completely out of scope, the question is then, which 3, 2 - which set of DID methods would be most appropriate for the WWW to say, "these are the official ones". That conversation has kindof been going on in the background for a while. e.g. some people think we may be able to get agreement to define did:key, did:web. But then there is the irony that if you have did:web, you are probably relying on DNS - not really very decentralized. Beyond that, nearly every other DID methods relies on some particular distributed ledger or blockchain - and they all have different security characteristics, different requirements on how we resolve them. For the commmunity to come together and say "this is the one" that we all agree on well enough to define normatively - on a technical level, what they are requiring it may be impossible for a QG to come to consensus - not only the DID method specifications themselves, but on which ones to start with in the first place. The other rebuttal there is, are you actually going to participate this time around? How dare you suggest there is more work to be done and you go off and do it? That's not how process works, how specifications are written. That's "go find a rock" - "no that rock is too grey" - "no that rock is too small". If there are members that have opinions on what ought to go in a spec or not - or ought to be worked on by a group or not - then the appropriate course of action is for that member company to join the working group and participate. For them to complain we haven't done the work, and also not participate in the work in the future, really means that, because they haven't claimed that we are doing is harmful in any real way, they really can't back up the statements. 713 | Like at DIF, if people want to create a work item, if someone outside the WG says, "hey C&C WG, you should really work on X, Y, Z" - C&C WG would say, "good to know, would you like to join us, submit a work item and get someone to work with you? 714 | W3C also recognizes it as an absurd notion - to say a WG should do something, and then disappear and not participate. 715 | Chris Kelly: I get Kaliya’s angle… it seems youa re trying to circumvent the technical arguments with the process arguemnts… but it’s not the case… the charter has been fulfilled and delivered upon. If it shold have looked differently, that should have been clear from the start. It’s too late yo move the goal post… 716 | Brent: It’s possible to disagree on technical solutions. “We think it should be JSON”, “We think it should be JSON-LD”… it’s harder to disagree on Process. The reason we are basing everything on a process argument… They can claim that we don’t have interoperability… But we can, according to the process, show that we have done everything we are supposed to do to show interoperability. We did what we said we would do in the charter… at least two implementations for each normative statement. They are saying “real interoperability requires more than that” - like Chris said, they are trying to move the goal posts. 717 | Chris: Also important to remember that the standards track is a long and winding road, but not a definite endpoint. v1. Hopefully will mature… But having a clearly defined start point is important. 718 | Brent: Couldn’t have said it better myself. 719 | Kaliya: great. 720 | Snoore: Has this objection shaken other groups’ reliance on DIDs? 721 | Brent: At first yes, some groups not familiar with process. Thought “Oh, it’s dead”. 722 | Back up… it’s not dead, not even dying. 723 | Some things need to be addressed - or even how appropriate it is to bring up those things. 724 | Then it goes to the director. We rely on process… pretty unlikely it will not be a rec. Possible it will be delayed. Very unlikely to disappear. 725 | Snoore: So if back to draft… two more years? 726 | Brent: It’s possible director will agree with concerns and say yes, need to 727 | recharter for two more years. But conversation in advance of that decision will need to be, exactly what does the new charter look like - and are you going to participate. It’s one thing to say we have concerns and go back draft… 728 | … We’d love to have Mozilla on board. We would like to engage with others. 729 | … No valid reason we shouldn’t make it a recommendation and then move forward. 730 | … If you want to participate in defining scope of work, you can do so. 731 | Snoore: thanks for sharing. Core foundation for a lot of things. Good to know you guys have it under control. Interesting times. 732 | Brent: For me the worst part of it is the waiting. I’m confident in what the resolution will be, and what the next steps for me to take will be - but there are steps othe rpeople need to take before I can take those - and I’m just sitting here waiting for the next step to have - and it’s oncomfruatebl. I appreciate the support from DIF and this group in particular. 733 | Snoore: We appreciate your work. 734 | Chris: I also want to thank Brent for taking us through this. This is the process. It’s important people refute statements about it being the end. We don’t need to be making big statements - but it’s important to remain positive, say good statements. Process is ongoing, we feel positive about it, believe in our work, watch this space. 735 | ``` 736 | 737 | ## Agenda - 8 Sep - US time 738 | 739 | Library interop polooza with Aries, Mattr, Spruce and Veramo 740 | 741 | 1. Aries presentation - aries protocols and test suite 742 | 2. Veramo presentation - work done towards did com and potentially credential exchange 743 | 3. Spruce presentation - unsure what would be different from veramo? 744 | 4. Mattr presentation - Talk about how they tackle introp in SVIP and participation of VC http api 745 | 746 | ### Announcements 747 | 748 | Juan (Spruce) on new interoperability efforts: 749 | - [JWS cross-conformance with JSON-LD](https://blog.identity.foundation/dif-grant-1-jws-test-suite/), work item within DIF under Claims & Credentials group 750 | - [Proposed LD-JWT interop work](https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues/198) item within W3C Credential CG 751 | 752 | ### Presentations 753 | 754 | #### Aries by Stephen Curran 755 | 756 | Aries: introduction, implementations, interoperability and test harness 757 | 758 | https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QzE0wBSZyYSCcwbU6huEDfspRKqnokE2WEwi-RitHVc/edit?usp=sharing 759 | 760 | Interop test suite information at https://aries-interop.info 761 | 762 | - Biggest concerns w.r.t interoperability getting more implementations to participate in interoperability and publish results 763 | 764 | #### Veramo by Oliver Terbu 765 | 766 | #### Spruce by Juan Caballero 767 | 768 | Web documentation at https://spruceid.dev/docs/didkit-packages/cli 769 | 770 | * command-line and HTTP API tooling for various decentralized identity mechanisms 771 | * focused on LD tooling first 772 | 773 | #### MATTR 774 | 775 | Update on DHS/SVIP plug-face 776 | 777 | web-based documentation at https://learn.mattr.global/api-reference/v1.0.1 778 | 779 | Goal is to enable primitives to exist to compose for use cases like interoperability testing 780 | 781 | ### Layers needing interoperability 782 | 783 | Model from Oliver: 784 | * VP/VCs -> Data Model, Crypto (Which curves? Do we need to touch upon this now), DID methods 785 | * VP request protocols (aka present-proof etc) + Data Model (e.g. Presentation Exchange) 786 | * VC issuance protocols (aka issue-creds etc.) + Data Model (e.g. Presentation Exchange) 787 | * VC revocation 788 | 789 | ### Questions to ask ourselves during layer discussion 790 | 791 | * What functionality have each library(company) implemented and tested and used? 792 | * What part of this layer interop is DIDCom solving? 793 | * What part of this layer interop is WACI PEX solving? 794 | * What part of this layer interop is PE exchange solving 795 | * What part of this layer interop is VC http api solving? 796 | * What part of this layer interop is the Aries protocols solving, Aries Protocols in general, the set of protocols in AIP 1.0 and AIP 2.0 in particular? 797 | * What part of this layer are the mentioned tools stepping on each others feet? 798 | * What part of this layer are we not seeing or mentioning where interoperability is needed? 799 | * Are we remembering that the same interop has to happen on a browser as well as a mobile phone? What layers need to be set in motion to have that ready? 800 | 801 | ### Diagram of various kinds of credentials 802 | https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/788#issuecomment-896734277 803 | 804 | ### Goal 805 | Make sure that we are having the right efforts in place and we believe these efforts will move things forward in the right direction. Highlight where there might be missing efforts. 806 | 807 | #### Appendix 808 | Working doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wWl442DQK0dHhtL8HHsbdtbpMxRL-_mjCPpb3RDQo3M/edit# 809 | 810 | 811 | 812 | ## Archive 813 | 814 | Older agendas and minutes moved to separate files: 815 | * [agenda2021.md](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/agenda2021.md) 816 | * [agenda2020.md](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/agenda2020.md) 817 | 818 | 819 | [edit-minutes]: https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw 820 | [eu-zoom]: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88984209816?pwd=ek9oRXRwSFlQOXhiQzNCTUE3TG91Zz09 821 | [dif]: https://identity.foundation/interoperability/ 822 | [repo]: https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability 823 | [maillist]: https://dif.groups.io/g/interop-wg 824 | [reference]: https://www.notion.so/dif/be6763341a014d248f655aea187d7890?v=c9ac48a07f3d411c9a1bea32b55f7e76 825 | [recordings]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wgccmMvIImx30qVE9GhRKWWv3vmL2ZyUauuKx3IfRmA/edit#gid=2146749098 826 | [parking-lot]: 827 | https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/parking-lot.md 828 | [iiw]: https://internetidentityworkshop.com 829 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /agenda2020.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Interoperability WG Rolling Agenda & Minutes 2 | 3 | [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw/badge)](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw) 4 | 5 | [early Zoom link - 0600PT](https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82475629186?pwd=a1RjenhHcEo0a0FKamdTdzVNaDNzUT09) | [late Zoom link - 1400PT](https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86023611186?pwd=WmVqWk9HOWRyK3l4TjhXaGgxa1VjUT09) | [DIF Website ](https://identity.foundation/interoperability/) | [**Repo & Issues**](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/issues) | [Mailing List](https://dif.groups.io/g/interop-wg) | [Reference Shelf](https://www.notion.so/dif/be6763341a014d248f655aea187d7890?v=c9ac48a07f3d411c9a1bea32b55f7e76) | [Meeting recordings](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wgccmMvIImx30qVE9GhRKWWv3vmL2ZyUauuKx3IfRmA/edit#gid=2146749098) 6 | 7 | _For this call, you are encouraged to turn your video on. This is a good way to build rapport given we are a large, disparate group experiencing a lot of churn._ 8 | 9 | _This document is live-edited DURING each call, and stable/authoritative copies live on our github repo under /agenda.md . Please note that we might not notice a pullrequest in time, but you are free to propose agenda items for future meetings via hackmd ._ 10 | 11 | ## Agenda - 30 Dec 2020 - Happy Holidays everybody! 12 | 13 | ## Agenda - 23 Dec 2020 - Happy Holidays everybody! 14 | 15 | ## Agenda - 16 Dec 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PT) - VC deep dive series: A VC-focused Tour of the Authenticator architecture with Tim Capalli (MSFT) 16 | 17 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/UhIV-vk98lnyeVLaHuGq_o_f8NiuQ2uKA3GM1vMtcg6z8T04y9ugnS6vRzbZkuYe.gy0oWuxjwibGyfXM) 18 | 19 |
20 | Notes 21 | Intros 22 | - Eric Kuhn (MSFT Id team) 23 | - Tim Capalli (MSFT since March) 24 | 25 | Intro 26 | - Authenticator now contains: PW manager and cred wallet, OTP handler, etc 27 | - screenshare and PPT slides (not yet live demo) 28 | - swimlane 29 | - Q&A 30 | * Nader: other did method roadmap? 31 | * Eric Kuhn: ION and only passive support for others for now (internal univ resolv) 32 | * Eric: Pres Exch asks for type by descriptor_map.id 33 | * Pam: Name all the specs? DID SIOP, VC and DID-core, PresExch, .well-known (being tested today); verification algo and curve? Secp256k1 for now; Wallet only holds JWT (secp);but Authenticator also verifies LD (ED25519) 34 | * Adrian: Wha't's SIOP adding here? Tim: If you were using a passport or authZ library, it usually has OIDC; this lets you drop SIOP in; Pam: If you're already supporting centralized stuff, this allows you to support VCs 35 | * Adrian: Consent roadmapped for later? Would you offer an open API, so that those of us that live in the intricate-consent landscape, would be able to use a plugin for more complex consent? 36 | - Tim: we were thinking more configuration API for setting defaults... 37 | - Adrian: Azure is all about a massive Configuration JSON object; the longterm goal is for VCs to course along pathways that have ; Eric: Not using CM yet (custom contract for now); once we move to CM, the inputs to the card would be mapped to available info; Adrian: I'm more con 38 | - Adrian: Should we build a catalog of customizations that can happen in each wallet? Linked secrets or pairwise a required feature of interop? 39 | * Tim: Pairwise by default -- should we ever allow op-in? 40 | * Eric: Authenticator knows to call an API to get a new VC for each new RP 41 | - Adrian: if we're not going to phone home and we're going to make pairwise the default, how do we break the glass in case of emergencies? Can a court order de-anonymize or trace back a pairwise? 42 | * Kaliya: Old-school LD VCs, without ZKP, weren't as concerned with total anonymity... 43 | * Nader: Hey Adrian, the answer to your question of how does blinded subject authentication work in the context of JSON-LD BBS+ is explained in this slide, starting on slide 12 44 | https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12uZUgNfcMu4-14VocC6DpXbv88Qef1ap-NWdbjh8eM8/edit?usp=sharing 45 | 46 | - Open to interop - reach out! working on documentation- reach out! 47 | 48 | 49 |
50 | 51 | ## Agenda - 9 Dec 2020 - US/EU time (0600 PT) - inteurop series - ESSIF & ESSIF-Lab interop deep dive - Daniel Du Seuil, Oskar van Deventer et al. 52 | 53 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/YJSiutQrX4VvI-H9_JZmaXP5tyd7DtqOqoHkTIXIuofCNhb2IFekEZ2K4FHqNco.FvPxN0QFxhlp2mYG) 54 | 55 | * more detailed tour of functional architecture for both projects 56 | * Daniel Du Seuil - A high-level overview of the ESSIF project 57 | * Timeline of specifications for different aspects of the project 58 | * Interop specifications discussion-- how to align with existing API standards? 59 | * Oskar van Deventer - An interop-focused (and open-call-detailed!) status update from the ESSIF-LAB incubator - [SLIDES HERE](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/raw/master/assets/guest-slides/20201209-van-Deventer%2C-Oskar__ESSIF-LAB%2BDIF-Interop.pdf) 60 | * Oskar: how we think about linking it up to ToIP (as an ecosystem, regarding governance, and terminology) - Is Dutch SSI ecosystem or eSSIF-Lab an “ecosystem”? Could eSSIF-Lab hand off their work as input documents to the Ecosystem Foundry? 61 | * Interop specifications discussion-- how to align with existing API standards? 62 | * Open Q&A 63 | 64 |
65 | Notes 66 | 67 | * Intros 68 | * Adrian Gropper ([HIE of One](https://hieofone.com/)): Working on Privacy things. 69 | * Dr. Susanne Guth-Oriowski, Chief Innovation & Solution Officer of [Spherity](https://www.spherity.com). 70 | 71 | * Daniel: ESSIF 72 | * Slides 73 | * *cough cough* millions of euros budgets for contracts for improvements on core services and infra 74 | * question what kind of ledger - some will be public permissioned. Hyperledger Bezu and Fabric are in use now. We will see other use-cases. EU looking at precommerical procurement and new protocols avaliable. 75 | * Question what should the standards groups be doing to be helpful? What we currently do we don't have an official representation in those groups, we might do so going forward. They are active in different working groups (ISO mentioned)public sector we are very affraid to build someting non-standard. We support all these kinds of things we need to be interoperable. It is public sector and needs to serve everyone. A lot of things are being still being evolved, discussed, it is evolving very fast, what are the things that are stable. Next year will be an important year. Are they compatable with emerging systems. EBSI will be interacting transcontinental working with Canada and Australia - there the standards will be more involved. 76 | * Question within ESSIF differnet frameworks and use - interoperability provided by the data registries on top. See GATCA doing some good work. EBSI won't be imposing the way we do it on other sectors. 77 | * Markus suggest that we could add the ESIF resolver to the universal resolver .Agreed yes. 78 | 79 | * Presentation by Oskar 80 | * We are using the metaphor of form filling. 81 | * We have a bunch of open calls. Business Open calls. 82 | * HOw everything works together for interoperability. 83 | * They are having various companies open sourcing wallet solution (including evernym) In the first business oriented open call - GATACA they are working on a generic verifier solution. They can use multiple SSI technologies. Generic SSI functionality offered on a commercial Basis. Open in March closes in May. Active in Area of deploma's Main requirements use SSI components. Everything tightly connected together. Scalabe interoperable. Here are a bunch of examples of things we are looking for. Counter measures vs. SSI coersion. It will be very easy to ask for access to your credentials. Looking for technical, legal business solution. Also looking at integration of different types of SSI tech - INdy/Aries is differet then ESIF. Surprise us! things that will be useful for SSI ecosystem. Third and may part - DIF interoperability working group - the whole purpose - we have these innovators building components and work together. Want thriving business SSI ecosystem. ESSIF lab providing funding and support for the commercial SSI implementations. Should work together components being developed within ESSIF-Lab we have some interop project - shouldn't that type of work happening in a broader arena such as DIF interop. Multiple groups ask to join - ESSIF party is small - DIF innterop is bigger. Once we develop these interoperabilty profiles we get to standardization. This is the architecture picture we are using. You probably recognized - focus on higher layers. 84 | * Picture shows a universal agent - issuer holder and verifier functionality. We don't like about many wallet solutions they are holder oriented - client-server. When it should be semetrical - if two parties do interactions they want to do mutual verification - (parties going to a website needing to know it is really that company) 85 | * Qualified data. 86 | * Work in progress - is this picture something we should contribute to DIF/ToIP? We have lots of sub-grantees. LInks show where to find 87 | * [DIF member] Evernym is open sourcing their verify.me platform. 88 | * DIF member] Validated=ID in EBSI/ESSIF will be driving interoperability with the eIDAS-Bridge. 89 | * Slide: List of busines oriented interope they are all over the map. 90 | * How to manage so much...How make something complex like this with 50-60 subgranties - and make it work? 91 | * Here is the DIF slide. 92 | * We are doing a lot - there is an interoperability effort. 93 | * Ecosystem foundry is at ToIP. WE don't have a standing organization and continuity - we want that. 94 | * **We don't have a method for interoperability and home for code**. To find what of this work can be done in 95 | * Questions: would you consider having a home in one of the organizations in the ecosystem. 96 | 97 | * Question asked about JSON-LD ZKP BBS+ - Daniel its far ahead of where the governments are. 98 | 99 |
100 | 101 | 102 | ## Agenda - 2 Dec 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PT) - VC deep dive series: Spec map project and BBS+-in-Aries 103 | 104 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/d7YIh26pIJ2jhq2PqFpy0UeoYfJ3GWldVXj6IuXHEKS9gIkcrAlKyAl5fTohhyUb.0H-RADOMVxp94aM3) 105 | 106 | * Introduction to [Spec Map](https://github.com/manicprogrammer/vc-spec-rel/) with researcher Michael Ruminer, talking about how to maintain it going forward 107 | * BBS+ in Aries overview with Stephen Curran 108 | 109 |
110 | Notes 111 | 112 | * Michael Ruminer 113 | * Self-education motivation - testing the hypothesis that with the right overview, the VC universe can be grokkable 114 | * Release page on github repo (already in DIF repo!) 115 | * plug for .drawio - open-source diagramming tool 116 | * quick tour of the diagram 117 | * white boxes - external to decentralized identity community 118 | * CCG-centric by formation, but looking forward to add more DIF and Hyperledger RFCs 119 | * Left out SIOP to make it to v1, hehe 120 | * Q & A 121 | * Adrian: DIDs out of scope? 122 | * I didn't 123 | * Pamela: What did you miss the most going through this? What would've made your life easier? 124 | * W3C specs all had pretty good normative and informative sections - the ones that didn't took longer and I deferred some of those 125 | * Juan: What's next? 126 | * I drew it from bottom to top, so there's more gaps (intentional and accidental) near the top 127 | * Adrian: VCs presumed to go to holder in too many of these maps; 128 | * Stephan: Kumu? Kaliya and I recommend it, it turns CSVs and excel spreadsheets into navigable graphs 129 | * it's XML underneath, so I'll have to play with Kumu and see how to best port it in! 130 | * Pamela: How useful were [our] intro videos? Michael: I just read spec by spec; I'll look at videos more when I add DIF specs! 131 | * Stephen's presentation - Aries Great Transformation 132 | * Moving Indy's role to "DIDs only"; moving VC to BBS+ to keep all the ZKP features but also comply fully with VC spec 133 | * First-Step - full support for w3c LD-VCs (but no ZKP or revocation) 134 | * SICPA's --> LD-proof/sig support in Acapy (manual sign/verify, not using Aries libraries) - W3C compliant but no ZKP 135 | * AriesGo supports RFC 36/37 (or 453/454) - rebuilding for other agent framework in Py and .NET 136 | * Credential storage in Aries "Askar"? Searchable/discoverable proof request? 137 | * Indy has "wallet query language" which search against proof request; how to replace? 138 | * Second-Step - finish BBS+ enough to spec out and roadmap Aries work in multiple languages 139 | * Third Step - Presentation Exhange 140 | * DIF's Pres Exch versus SVIP version (not yet thoroughly reviewed against featureset of Indy wallet req and/or BBS+) 141 | * DIF Pres Exch (allows multiple credentials into one VP, which helps BBS+ proof/verify style) 142 | * Other topics 143 | * Storage searching for credentials 144 | * Support in wallets and other mobile apps 145 | * Can anoncreds and BBS+ be supported at same time? backwards compatibility and cross-verification? 146 | * Q & A 147 | * Pam: Discovery in the wallet not currently in-scope for PE-- would you put it in scope if you could? 148 | * Stephen: I don't mind it being out of scope, because that gets into wallet/storage design 149 | * Stephen: Early days of Indy, searching was important in OrgBook's 7million VCs-- 150 | * DID-Only Indy 151 | * Draft DID:Indy [spec](https://hackmd.io/@icZC4epNSnqBbYE0hJYseA/S1eUS2BQw) puts non-DID objects(schema, revocation registries, etc) into did docs and refers to them as URIs ; (BBS+ don't need the schema and credDef anyways); RevReg will stay on-ledger 152 | * Adrian: having trouble reconciling DIDs, BBS+, and confidential storage - it seems to me that adding stuff to the DID-core might be a bad idea? I like DIDs as control structures only :D; why not lean on some of the stuff being pushed in the confidential storage group ? Might the three (DID control structure, storage, and selective disclosure) be orthogonal by design? 153 | * Stephen: Using DID as indirection layer makes cross-ledger interactions much simpler and 154 | 155 |
156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | ## Agenda - 25 Nov 2020 - US/EU time (0600 PT) - inteurop series - ESSIF-LAB and Odyssey Momentum 160 | 161 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/n3jWlu5E2vkS5llHMWPIf4PRRhmur5s1eDwJ8oxp0GgVUkMr0-LGTqtW3AtvzWwz.s4KMZtub051SiE4P) 162 | 163 | Report-out about Odyssey Momentum (30min) with Rieks Joosten ([TNO](https://www.tno.nl/en/focus-areas/information-communication-technology/roadmaps/data-sharing/ssi/)) 164 | * SSI track and other tracks (like Conscious Cities) 165 | * DIF members [Gimly](https://www.gimly.io/blog) won the KLM supply chain track with a [VC solution](https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6734757528330088448/) based on [Tangem NFC](https://gimly.io/tangem-by-gimly) cards ! 166 | * [SSI Infrastructure Gateway](https://github.com/OdysseyMomentum/ssi-service-backend) by [TNO](https://www.tno.nl/en/focus-areas/information-communication-technology/roadmaps/data-sharing/ssi/) (includes IRMA, Jolocom, eSatus) 167 | * Source is open; live APIs running on essif-lab GRNet & at Odyssey Github & DigiCampus 168 | * API where issuers can send their credential-payloads to, and where verifiers can request to obtain credentials containing such payloads 169 | * Currently supports: IRMA, Jolocom, eSatus 170 | * Soon to support: IDA (Rabobank ULA) 171 | * the 'SSI-gateway' as an SSI infrastructure adopter (story was developed at the Odyssey!) 172 | * Rabobank - [Universal Ledger Agent](https://github.com/rabobank-blockchain/universal-ledger-agent) (outlined at [RWOT8](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/universal-ledger-agent.md)) 173 | 174 | ESSIF-LAB (30min): 175 | 176 | * high-level overview of TNO/eSSIF-Lab overall SSI vision 177 | * Rieks: Work on Terminology and ["documentation interop"](https://essif-lab.pages.grnet.gr/framework/docs/terms/pattern-party-actor-action) 178 | * In particular, the "Local assurance communities" idea from CCI 179 | * Broader category of decentralized governance (the 'local assurance community'-concept as initiated with CCI → whitepaper with Drummond?) 180 | * ideas about non-tech interop topics (specifically what we have come to call 'documentation interop') 181 | * Quick tour of published conceptual materials 182 | 183 |
184 | Notes 185 | * contact information for the speakers here! 186 | * rieks.joosten at tno.nl 187 | * chris.lee at mydata.org 188 | * Jacob.boersma at dutchblockchaincoalition.org 189 | * caspar at gimly.io 190 | 191 |
192 | 193 | ## Agenda - 18 Nov 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PT) 194 | 195 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/-Xk7R0pgZBHzNjfOMen30xnRZssW6WQppNvQH9KDNwgou8qoRhR8vsKf0uiopc4.e0HwFp387JmwS7M_) 196 | 197 | ### LD/BBS+ Education: Walkthroughs and Mental Models/Reports from the Field 198 | 199 | Tobias - "BBS+ 201" 200 | - Tobias will be overviewing and answering questions about his IIW [presentation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVnCVzW0rkI) 201 | - Additional recommended reading: 202 | - Tobias' colleague [Nader Helmy](https://medium.com/mattr-global/jwt-vs-linked-data-proofs-comparing-vc-assertion-formats-a2a4e6671d57): is BBS+ really a "credential format" or is it a combination of credential handling and presenting methods? Is it a security model? Does the "credential format" mental model underestimate or misframe the kinds of changes needed to fully "go BBS+"? 203 | - The [paper](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot9-prague/blob/master/final-documents/alice-attempts-abuse-verifiable-credential.md) on Sybil-proofing VC exchange referenced at minute 18.30 of Tobias' video from RWoT9, by WG co-chair Pam Dingle, Daniel Hardman, researcher Sven Hammon, et al. 204 | - Discussion questions 205 | 1. To what degree is this a VC "format", and to what degree is it a VP upgrade? 206 | 1. What standards need to change/upgrade for these additional values ("proofValue", "subjectAuthenticationMethod", etc.) to be widespread? Consequences for core VC spec, LD-Proof spec, etc? 207 | 1. How are domains and linked secrets related, in the Aries universe? Are systems outside of the Aries world using domain-based indirection? 208 | 1. How big is the "lift" (or level of effort) for Aries systems post-[RFC 47](https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/blob/master/concepts/0047-json-ld-compatibility/README.md)? How big for non-Aries systems already using LD-VCs today? How big for JWT-native systems? 209 | 1. [If time allows] Could we talk more about "Just-in-time Issuance" and "Trusted Witness" solutions? 210 | 211 | ## Agenda - 11 Nov 2020 - US/APAC time (0600 PST) 212 | 213 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/gK2c_j1egVfEcOLCLENZoocsp7R5K5Ph5MaEQBXjLz_DEYSUkUQW1awd_2LqU784.wvUY74TK_KfAZqbb) 214 | 215 | ### Side-bar: Human-Centric Approaches & Updates 216 | 217 | Discussion 218 | - Presentation: Domains of Identity and human-centric design/UX as corrective for market-driven interop 219 | - Other ongoing/current events 220 | - Adrian: Update on Gold-Button Interop 221 | - Kaliya: Take-aways from DID-Core TPAC 222 | - "Now what?": Open discussion from last week's sessions (available on youtube for those who missed it) 223 | - Recap from last week: videos of Orie's presentation and Kim's are up! 224 | - Sneak preview of next week: homework! a [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVnCVzW0rkI) and an [article](https://medium.com/mattr-global/jwt-vs-linked-data-proofs-comparing-vc-assertion-formats-a2a4e6671d57) 225 | 226 | Links from the discussion today 227 | - MyData Gold-Button demo/mockup [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrFM9-fFiE0) by Chris Lee 228 | - GNAP protocol mentioned by Adrian: 229 | - 119 page draft spec at [IETF](https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-gnap-core-protocol-01.html) 230 | - Justin Richter's GNAP presentation from the [highly technical] SDS [working group regular meeting](https://lists.identity.foundation/g/sds-wg/wiki/24092) 231 | - His GNAP presentation at yesterday's meeting of [W3C-CCG](https://github.com/w3c-ccg/meetings) (transcript/rec not yet live on github i believe) 232 | 233 | ## Agenda - 4 Nov 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PST) 234 | 235 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/KjUmnvS2rrfZ_WsPSggzxZP3s-OP36zq3IdbkoMndK0a96Kid81ucsIt-iRSnvME.sNDt6isH9BOJMmnI) 236 | 237 | ### LD/BBS+ Education Pt. 1: Walkthroughs and Mental Models/Reports from the Field 238 | - Guest Presenter #1: Orie Steele- [The What and Why of the DIF general-purpose Document-Loader](https://youtu.be/-yUbMDft5O0) 239 | - Guest Presenter #2: Kim H Duffy - [W3C-CCG Edu Creds Task Force & Tooling/Sandbox Intro](https://youtu.be/AEb02JGCArM) (Overview of CCG LD tooling) 240 | 241 | Minutes 242 | * Opening discussion 243 | * Document-Loader introduction by Orie (Transmute) 244 | * Intro: What do DIDs and VCs do, ideally? 245 | * Definitions: "resolution" (in DID-core) and "representations" (LD versus vanilla-JSON versus...) 246 | * DID Doc versus OIDC federation of centralized IDs 247 | * Resolution mechanics vary significantly by representation; most methods have one "native" rep that skews its resolution mental model 248 | * In LD-land, document-loader is the norm (essential to all LD-centric methods' resolution mechanisms) 249 | * Document-Loader as recursive/general-purpose derefencer 250 | * JSON-LD core spec models/specs this 251 | * Sidebar q: novice-friendlier explanation of representations-- does it matter to privacy people? to security people? 252 | * Orie: Each representation is governed by a spec (JSON RFCs, for ex); it has limitations, allowances, features, assumptions, more or less built-in data types; 253 | * DID-Core takes LD dereferencing and extends it to a whole identifier system; extending it to vanilla JSON, XML, CBOR, etc gets complicated and implies "LD problems," i.e. how to do resolution and resolving 254 | * [Mental note: return to Adrian's question about security and privacy issues inherent in resolution/dereferencing] 255 | * Document-loading - a particular way of resolving data; DID-core has its origins in this kind of resolution 256 | * many interoperability problems at the PKI layer and at the assertion-format layer arise from "gaps" between representations or between specs written with different assumptions in mind 257 | * codifying did-core dereferencing logic (going from string --> did doc) got written by uPort team and has been foundational for many non-LD systems; JWT proof formats similarly had to be built by equivalence; 258 | * more general d-l logic: 259 | * did resolution: string --> doc 260 | * schema.org 261 | * Azure IoT and other contexts that identify entities with strings --> also D-L 262 | * Kim: Overview of [VC-Edu group](w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed) at CCG 263 | * Major work items: 264 | * Modeling Ed Creds - usecase driven (ins and outs, design principles, lessons learned) 265 | * Credential Finder - LD-powered discovery engine 266 | * Not an SDO, but wide participation and experience: PESC IMS-Global and other international bodies (mostly EU) 267 | * "unblock and accelerate our pilots" 268 | * legal signature requirements (CAs, x509, regional/national specifics about eSigs) 269 | * XML and PDFs = 270 | * DCC Credential [Playground](digitalcredentials.github.io/playground) - sandbox for LD VCs and 271 | * /sign-and-verify/ tools = 272 | * /credgen/ = template tool (generates LD VC templates using {{moustached pattern-matching}}) 273 | * Other useful links 274 | * Mattr's BBS+ LD proofs [spec](https://github.com/w3c-ccg/ldp-bbs2020) 275 | * LD VCs standardized on LD-centric CCG [exch protocol](https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vc-http-api) 276 | * Q&A 277 | * Keith (Workday) - We're working on a pilot - is anyone else using the LER wrapper? 278 | * Kim: Interop test suites (orig. SVIP, now CCG) - conformance test suites 279 | * Pam: What would you like this group to do? 280 | * Kim: context: ACE blockchain challenge and wallets; DIF would be a good location for practical ongoing discussion of logistics for those kinds of venues 281 | * Future agenda topic - Power in the standards process - separation of concerns as a mantra for protecting against coupling of ontology and platform mechanics? 282 | 283 | ## Agenda - 28 Oct 2020 - US/APAC time (600 PST) 284 | 285 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/bCUbntNNU3sMC6yzhANZSIitaE5znl00jrgzhOO1G0EcjeedS6aMzRb7WVcZtQg7.J3C0GXqJTy2pUowi) 286 | 287 | Agenda 288 | * Last call for nits on Transcommunity map before it goes to the graphic design pros 289 | * Crowd-sourcing an #IIW31 *Interop-relevant* Reading List (feel free to propose before or after the meeting via hackmd or github) - working draft [here](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/assets/iiw31guide.md) - feel free to propose additional rows async or on Wednesday's call 290 | 291 | Minutes 292 | * Announcements 293 | * SDS meeting this week will feature Justin Richer talking about GNAP (formerly OAuth.XYZ) for people researching cutting-edge authorization/authentication 294 | * [infosphere.net](https://identosphere.net/#projects) (planet identity reboot) - digest of blogs and feeds relevant to this work 295 | * Took notes at the bottom of this open hackmd [doc]([here](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/assets/iiw31guide.md)) 296 | 297 | 298 | ## Agenda - 21 Oct 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PST) **MEETING CANCELED FOR IIW** 299 | 300 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/MwDSAOFT5zdylbrFOZZ_1af9wGjuZ4kAouVj6qIweupOOSww_aQFiV7T6QpuB8s6.lumWmYFiy9O7q2Li) 301 | 302 | * Notes for IIW31 303 | * Link to madlib/questionnaire #2 posted in ADVANCE and announced IN OPENING CIRCLE (drop hackmd link!) 304 | * Possible other presentations or sessions: 305 | * DIF Interoperability WG read-out and requirements gathering?? 306 | * Agenda: 307 | * readout, deliverable show-and-tell 308 | * educational demands and gaps 309 | * Interop targets discussion 310 | 311 | 312 | * Link tree (moved to repo [readme](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/)) 313 | 314 | ## Agenda - 14 Oct 2020 - US/APAC time (600 PST) 315 | 316 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/-Nl0lzhPZkhM6gd0DCvffS_J9DFXHWvyBG1ZdNWSZCN2KAhXgobWsLmOxupjxb5B.R9XLwt5dTpwO2U5i) 317 | 318 | * Crowd-edit First draft of the wallet grid? (10min) 319 | * Interoperability **targets**: what would you like to be working towards? what would you work towards if enough other people are working towards as well? 320 | * *Can we formulate a google form questionnaire for distribution at IIW?* 321 | * Quick discussion: DID Controllers? 322 | 323 |
Minutes: 324 | 325 | Attendees: 326 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 327 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 328 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 329 | * Sam Curren 330 | * Adrian Gropper 331 | * Balazs Nemethi 332 | * John Walker 333 | * Adrian Field 334 | * Kenroy 335 | * Martin Riedel 336 | * Philip Kaiser 337 | * Sam Rookard 338 | * Simone Ravaioli 339 | * Tim Cappalli 340 | * Harm Jam Arendshorst 341 | 342 | 343 | 344 | 345 | * Introductions and Hellos 346 | * Updates and Announcements 347 | * IIW - session is planned for the interoperability group, will let group know when time/breakout is assigned 348 | 349 | * Interoperability targets 350 | * Education/target chicken and egg 351 | * Break down big targets like "BBS+" into smaller pieces, like "how to handle/verify LD VCs", "how to use the linter and the document-loader", "what else needs to be done before BBS+" 352 | * Adrian: "authorization" is big here 353 | * Adrian: wallet-centric assumption in VC centrality 354 | * BBS+ - informal poll showed support for learning more 355 | * For BBS+: What are the one-meeting topics? 356 | 1. Issuance and **data model** of a BBS+ VC (WHO LEADS THIS? Tobias? --note time zones--] ) Oct 28? 357 | 2. How to initiate exchange (and how it relates to pres exch?) - 358 | 3. LD Pres Req - how is it diff, relying on LD **framing**? 359 | 4. BBS+ Revocation - issuance and mgmt of revocation 360 | * Presentation Exchange (known as proof requests in Aries) 361 | * GNAP and Scoped Authz 362 | * Update on [Wallet Matrix](https://hackmd.io/t1cotiReTXCnkpDG8k2tVA) 363 | 364 |
365 | 366 | ## Agenda - 7 Oct 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PST) 367 | 368 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/NHcELUXRMZHdF1c2b_GniKo-wW2e_NxiV1RkyhQowhjKp9v8MMpcodhbyok0im6X.RVZpVK6BiFgIirNu) 369 | 370 | 1. Updates and Announcements 371 | 372 | * Please sign up for the [mailing list](mailto:interop-wg+subscribe@lists.identity.foundation) if you haven't already! 373 | 374 | 1. Rough-draft of Wallet Credential Format [Matrix](https://hackmd.io/@SBZlkBsMSQqomxsAiSgoNg/rkBnu3ELP/edit) - feel free to fill in YOUR OWN rows before the meeting! 375 | 3. Results of [questionnaire](https://forms.gle/suZpoM4TH11wNneD8) - Skillshare/technical matchmaking proposal 376 | 4. IIW planning? 377 | 378 |
Minutes: 379 | 380 | Attendees: 381 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 382 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 383 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 384 | * Hakan Yildiz (TU Berlin) 385 | * Adrian Gropper (HIE of One) 386 | * Tim Capalli 387 | * Carlos Rodrigues 388 | * Sam Curren 389 | * Stephen Curran 390 | * Matt McKinney 391 | 392 | * Introductions and Hellos 393 | * Updates and Announcements 394 | 395 |
396 | 397 | ## Agenda - 30 Sep 2020 - US/EU time (0600 PST) 398 | 399 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/slysribRqId5nAnV1SIUUhrp3dy6ROjGT7J2M059sYjjrOxEadl8rF13vciL8DL7.mhRGHB4ah4Lw7cdT) 400 | 401 | 1. Introductions and Hellos 402 | 1. Updates and Announcements 403 | 404 | * Meeting on DHS SVIP UX contest during the DIF Product Manager's (also non-IPR, open) [meeting](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2020Sep/0088.html) 405 | 406 | 3. Final round of edits on [map](https://whimsical.com/CUhk3dT4RUZvGa4Lt7rNvD) (**5min**) 407 | 4. Chairs will present draft [questionnaire](https://forms.gle/suZpoM4TH11wNneD8) (**20-25min** to annotate, discuss, and fill out on the call; followup over email list for non-attendees and recording listeners) 408 | 5. Roadmapping - following on last week's discussion (see below), we'll hone in on wallet projects for the short term. how to define wallet interop with issuers and verifiers? what's the low-hanging fruit that's helpful to the wallet alignment process (and "wars") on the horizon? 409 | 410 | 411 |
Minutes: 412 | 413 | * intros and updates 414 | * final tweaks on map (mostly renaming layers and splitting recovery/portability bucket into two buckets; also some tweaks around ) 415 | * filling out awareness survey & fine-tuning it for the rest of the hour 416 | 417 |
418 | 419 | ## Agenda - 23 Sep 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PST) 420 | 421 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/rd85JFPkSpGy7XyXT6fRb_GVJ8RN7EGwNKkmDAoKZiFfr67V9adGvHGuYb_26wlM.qz-Q15k5i1shYEtd) 422 | 423 | 1. Updates and Announcements 424 | 425 | * New publication: [major spec and adjacent org quick reference](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/raw/master/assets/map-of-adjacent-orgs-and-specs--sept-2020--one-sided.pdf) guide ("light" version of our mapping!) 426 | 427 | 3. Final round of edits on [map](https://whimsical.com/CUhk3dT4RUZvGa4Lt7rNvD) (**10min**) - punted to next week due to Zoom room chaos 428 | 4. Present draft [questionnaire](https://forms.gle/suZpoM4TH11wNneD8) (**10-15min** to draft or do? followup over email list for non-attendees and recording listeners) 429 | 5. Roadmapping - The chairs have suggestions but open to lobbying and dissent if the group has other ideas 430 | 431 | 432 | | Title | Explanation | Target Deliverable(s)| 433 | |--|--|--| 434 | | Test Suite Jamboree | Apples-to-apples comparison of available test suites and how we could leverage them here | If possible: matrix showing equivalent suite results across stacks | 435 | | Pres-Exch/Aries alignment| The DIF Presentation Exchange spec has flows and assumptions that are hard to reconcile with Aries flows and assumptions. | 1. minor pull requests against both specs 2. implementation guidance that would make Aries wallets easier to comply with Pres Exch and vice versa. 3. a great deep-dive blog post for the DIF Medium :D | 436 | | Wallet Method Support |Wallet can resolve a DID *and* know how to verify the VCs it can sign? | * Matrix of methods per Wallet for generated and resolved DIDs * DID Resolution implementation guidelines for wallet designers/implementers? I.e., how do you get from a method spec to supporting those methods | 437 | | Wallet Credential Format Support | Which formats of credentials can wallets parse and validate? | Matrix of supported credential formats | 438 | |Human-centric interoperability|See Adrian's MyData event on [Gold Button](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZ7_Skcn4zb3zOfEu7XZDrYAmLR1T_pbBoSk8AEfrSg/edit) and [https://github.com/w3c/did-use-cases/issues/101](https://github.com/w3c/did-use-cases/issues/101)|Profile? A map similar to the whimsical| 439 | |Revocation comparison overview| Status Method Registry at W3C is a little under-updated | Guidance on updating <-- and tentative or pre-spec draft of cross-community revocation-check spec [*Note: ZKP revocation versus "herd privacy" solutions are not equivalent and such a spec might need to differentiate schools of privacy engineering or allow implementers to be opinionated about this distinction per use case!*] | 440 | |DID Method / KeyType Matrix (Dmitri's idea)| Make a survey of implemented DID Methods and list cryptographic key types that they support | A table in github or a spreadsheet/CSV file| 441 | || | | 442 | |< your idea here >| | | 443 | 444 | 445 |
Minutes: 446 | 447 | Attendees: 448 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 449 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 450 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 451 | * Adrian Gropper (HIE of One) 452 | * Hakan Yildiz (TU Berlin) 453 | * Marty Reed (RANDA) 454 | * Matt McKinney (ArcBlock) 455 | * John Walker (SemanticClarity) 456 | 457 | 458 | 1. Introductions and Hellos 459 | 1. Updates and Announcements 460 | 1. 461 | 462 |
463 | 464 | ## Agenda - 16 Sep 2020 - US/EU time (0600 PST) 465 | 466 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/5yz0MCbJczXzr33-6xeK5xRlXaDSef6zZfV2mfVIrA-SiSXiXU3Z5pD3cmhT_P3s.RLW8DtfYZYZ68Ono) 467 | 468 | 1. Updates and Announcements 469 | 2. Confirm Liaison list 470 | 4. Finish Whimsical (20min max, queued) 471 | 472 | * Martin's new version - intra-layer protocols 473 | * Rouven was right-- "20 min max" and "finish" should not both have been on this item! 474 | * Reconciling and bringing back next week 475 | * authn/z and recovery/portability issue 476 | 477 | 6. Questionnaire based on whimsical? 478 | * moved to next week 479 | 480 | 8. Roadmapping part 1; proposed *multiweek/long-term* work items (bring your own! add your own to the table following our precedent!) 481 | * Who knows the relevant test suites? 482 | * Chart of options moved to next week 483 | 484 | Question was raised about meaning of the word wallet and the prior work by the [DIF Glossary group](https://medium.com/decentralized-identity/finding-the-bell-curve-of-meaning-61a1d22b7bdd) was linked to. 485 | 486 |
Minutes: 487 | 488 | Attendees: 489 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 490 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 491 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 492 | * Chris Lee (MyData Korea) 493 | * Martin Riedel (ConsenSys) 494 | * Hakan Yildiz (TU Berlin) 495 | * Rouven Heck (ConsenSys) 496 | * sankarshan (Dhiway) 497 | * Matthew Hailstone (BYU) 498 | * Scott Malley (Sphereon) 499 | * Simone Ravaioli (Digitary) 500 | * Adrian Gropper (HIE of One) 501 | * Stephen Curran (Cloud Compass Computing Inc.) 502 | * Sam Rookard (Accenture) 503 | * Catherine Nabbala 504 | * Denis Popov 505 | * Kristina Yasuda 506 | * Marnix 507 | * Ralf Knobloch 508 | * Sankarshan 509 | * Scott Malley 510 | * Simone Ravaioli 511 | * Stas Demchuck 512 | * Stephen Curran 513 | * Matt McKinney 514 | 515 | 516 | 1. Introductions and Hellos 517 | 1. Updates and Announcements 518 | 1. Liaison list {from collective memory!} 519 | 520 | * **Solid Community - Dmitri?** 521 | * MyData - Chris Lee (MyData Korea) 522 | * **A New Governance - ??** 523 | * NIST Big Data Public WG - 524 | * Specific IEEE Standards groups 525 | * CNCF Security SIG 526 | * ILR project - Simone Ravaioli 527 | * Trust-over-IP Foundation - Ajay Jadhav (with support from Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) 528 | * IETF - OAuth WG in partic 529 | * OIDF - Kristina Yasuda 530 | * INATBA - Joachim Lohkamp 531 | * T3 Innovation Network 532 | * *Note: (ongoing thread to sign a liaison agreement)* 533 | * Europass - (acting Liaison Simone Ravaioli, until further notice) 534 | * GLEIF - Juan will reach out this week 535 | * W3C - acting liaison Orie until further notice (?) 536 | * PKI/eIDAS orgs - Juan is reaching out this week :D 537 | * **EBSI/ESSIF - ?** 538 | * ISO - ? 539 | * *Note: ToIP has a relationship with the Blockchain group, might be worth asking if a direct or indirect contact would be of interest or at least an email address?* 540 | * Aries - Sam Curren 541 | 542 |
543 | 544 | ## Agenda - 9 Sep 2020 - US/APAC time (1400 PST) 545 | 546 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/I7wkWou9zNSDE6SjFIszQeWN5elHAmwU_hz3DLtlImEGIChyDOSST9XN-x9HNTKS.4WFt4LMRBOfQ-2QY) 547 | 548 | 0. Introductions and Hellos 549 | 2. Updates and Announcements 550 | * IIW31 earlybird tickets end today! 551 | * Shout-out to Adrian's thread on the [mailinglist](https://dif.groups.io/g/interop-wg/topics) about human-centric interop and the UX work-- we promise we'll get back to this! It's deferred (see "future topics" at top of this running agenda), but it's definitely not tabled. See also https://github.com/w3c/did-use-cases/issues/101 552 | * In the meantime, interested parties are welcome to join the DIF Product Managers' **non-IPR-protected** [community of practice](https://dif.groups.io/g/id-productmanagers), which is currently in a multi-week discussion of human-centric UX thinking around SSI onboarding processes. 553 | * Thread on DECO project out of Cornell on [CCG](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2020Sep/0005.html) - may be worth addressing or socializing in this group if there is interest/demand 554 | * Deputize queue-masters from the back seat: see something, say something! 555 | 1. Refactor mapping exercise into layers 556 | * optional homework: leave comments on the [whimsical](https://whimsical.com/VVRMbTi9bPsCqagmRVNGvm), or fork it and make your own variants to compare/contrast next week or OOB? Whimsical instructions [here](https://www.notion.so/dif/Procedural-Notes-github-etc-d31f543e8a94441ebeb1550e671ff195) 557 | * [Martin and Nader might present variants?] 558 | * Unqueued discussion to follow 559 | * Parking lot for assumptions different in other use cases? 560 | * Holder-not-subject 561 | * nonhuman subjects 562 | * etc etc 563 | 3. [IF time allows] Draft questionnaire based on map (proposed- pending group interest)? 564 | 4. anyone want to give a 5min overview of the Decentralization Rubric (early version [here](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot9-prague/blob/master/draft-documents/decentralized-did-rubric.md#15governance-openness), most recent version [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rYdWiwawWmLOWtHRvT0GzYcdewW_OS9M2mAkENLFdtY/ 565 | ))? 566 | 567 |
568 | Minutes 569 | 570 | Attendees 571 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 572 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 573 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 574 | * Sam Curren (DIDComm/Aries) 575 | * Adrian Gropper 576 | * Orie Steele 577 | * Hakan Yildiz 578 | * Brett McDowell (Hedera Hashgraph) 579 | * Taylor Kendal 580 | * Carlos Rodrigues (Bloom Protocol) 581 | * Marty Reed 582 | * Delia AC 583 | * John Walker 584 | * Martin Riedel 585 | * Wayne Chang 586 | * Yang Lu 587 | * Tom Danner 588 | 589 | Minutes: 590 | * Introductions and Hellos 591 | * Brett McDowell - Hedera Hashgraph 592 | * Taylor Kendal - Learning Economy Fndn 593 | * Mapping Exercise 594 | * Pam Dingle talking about the slices of the stack and naming 595 | * there are exchange of verifiable credentials as one main use case and decentralized Applications "DApps" as another one and asking people to think about how this set of use-cases 596 | * From chat: 597 | * Brent would like Hedera's [method listed too](https://www.hedera.com/blog/hedera-hashgraph-joins-world-wide-web-consortium-w3c-new-did-method-published-by-w3c-credentials-community-group#:~:text=The%20Hedera%20DID%20Method%20leverages,to%20the%20Decentralized%20Identity%20model). 598 | * Orie suggested that the The algorithm bucket is lacking… better to link to 599 | * https://www.iana.org/assignments/jose/jose.xhtml#web-signature-encryption-algorithms 600 | * https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ld-cryptosuite-registry/ 601 | * DIDComm = SOAP 2.0: I like soap, its a message format, that is transport agnostic, and supports routing, and other sub specs :) … sorta like did comm… but sadly soap is xml focused…. didcomm is currently JSON + DID focused… did comm does a not of stuff, but its mostly about a message format that works with dids. 602 | * that's a pretty good summary. 603 | * Im sorry I know being compared to soap is triggering… but FWIW, I loved Visual Basic and SOAP and WSDL… some of the first coding I ever did. 604 | * AuthN is very different from AuthZ. But then again, I'm not sure what the goal of this inventory is. Do we need to differentiate them? What's the end game here? 605 | * Tom: D So if you look at this from the perspective of a resource server serving up health data about a patient, you can use did auth to prove the identity of an entity seeking patient data. You use SIOP to communicate the fact that there’s a valid credential that AUTHORIZES that entity to access the particular patient data, as example. 606 | * Orie: Authorizations mostly go in the http header… mostly… 607 | * Brett: After you are authenticated (AuthN), then you get authorized to access certain resources (AuthZ) 608 | * Sam: not necessarily with OCAP ZCAP. you can have AuthZ with those, but no authentication. 609 | * Orie: Yep, capabilities sole existence is to avoid authN… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confused_deputy_problem 610 | * Taylor: Curated Edu pilots list - https://lerhub.org/s/curators/specs-0/ZT3McEDpgKayCXyqc-0 611 | 612 |
613 | 614 | ## Agenda - 2 Sep 2020 - US/EU time (0600 PST) 615 | 616 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/eVXH7VDDRD_gCgNmG77_HNbeggD6-QXUq7AHsar976yW67NCMo8IsiIiJPf5H3zk.EYEuZyrL5GLwBvIE) 617 | 618 | 0. Updates and Announcements 619 | * Indy Interop-a-thon rages on, and many video recordings are already live on the HL Aries Confluence [page](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/II/Agenda). Thanks to Linux Foundation for the storage and the infrastructure! Notes from each session are in the [qiqochat site](https://indy-interop.qiqochat.com/) for now, but will be moved to Aries Confluence soon. 620 | * [#IIW31](https://internetidentityworkshop.com/) earlybird tickets close soon - Oct 20-22 (Tu-Th) 621 | 4. Begin Mapping questionnaire discussion or ideation? Work item for chairs? 622 | 6. Continue Mapping review and discussion 623 | 624 |
625 | Minutes 626 | * Self-Introductions 627 | * Martin Riedel (ConsenSys R&D Eng) 628 | * Denis Popov (Affinity, Eng Team) - here for same! 629 | * Stas Demchuk (Affinity, Eng Lead) - looking forward to scaling globally with the help of this group 630 | * Pam: could the questionnaire be a MadLibs-style fill-in-the-blank paragraph? 631 | * Juan: Rename DID-Doc Storage? because DID-Docs are one-time/ephemeral, what's being stored is Resolution Metadata/data 632 | * Martin: layering might be a little easier to understand if it were protocol and app layer rather than DID and VC; **PRIMITIVES** off to one side (libraries or tools that appear throughout) 633 | * Adrian: Layers metaphor inherited from narrow waist (TCP/IP) theory and classic internet standards (link to KERI slide?); is narrow waist pertinent? worth keeping in mind? 634 | * KERI slide [deck](https://github.com/SmithSamuelM/Papers/blob/master/presentations/KERI2_Overview.web.pdf) slides 8-13ish 635 | * Juan: Debate as to which layer/bucket is the narrowest waist 636 | * Adrian: But if we knew that, we'd have a universal/shared understanding/definition of interop and big picture! 637 | * Adrian: My opinion is that any waist is a human-readable/market-legible badge of standards-driven interoperability ; I call it a "gold button" to hide the DID/handshake nittygritty 638 | * Kaliya: let's not conflate technical and human-readable answers to the question! 639 | * Pamela: Are DIDs themselves one waist or interoperable layer? 640 | * Adrian: Authentication and Authorization functions of DIDs are a waist 641 | * Pam: I think VCs are a second waist/neck/whatever; We need a trust layer to perform trusted/verifiable operations, or else no one care about DIDs 642 | * Rouven: Standardization of a payload; Timothy Ruff's "container" [article](https://medium.com/@rufftimo/verifiable-credentials-arent-credentials-they-re-containers-fab5b3ae5c0) comes to mind 643 | * Adrian: I think we are quite far away from standardization at the DID layer-- Joe Andreiu, Sam Smith, and other core people are still debating VERY fundamental stuff at this late date in the [DID-core group](https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/)... 644 | * Rouven: Goals might be a helpful orthogonal or supplemental question: what usecases or features make all this worthwhile? What is the payoff motivating choices within buckets. 645 | * Scott Malley: Devil's advocate-- doesn't "why" risk going out of scope? Taken far enough, this is not an interop question (e.g. advising on choice of DID Methods, assessing did methods according to the rubric) 646 | 647 | 4. Parking Lot 648 | * Adrian: Have we failed if normal people have to know what a DID is? 649 | * Rouven: What motivates design choices? Can these be linked to tradeoffs or decisions WITHIN this map? 650 | * **Maybe the madlib/questionnaire should have a `BECAUSE...` entry for each other entry?** 651 | * Adrian: I'm bored, can we spend the same amount of time on a human-centric mapping? [**proposed work item**] 652 | 653 |
654 | 655 | ## Agenda - 26 Aug 2020 - afternoon time (1400 PST) 656 | 657 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/1MhsM6OzrlNLY53GyG3ZV6MODKXHeaa81HAd8vcIzB3NP5fG7S_MWJmMEvSVNNtm) 658 | 659 | * Announcements 660 | * Juan sends his regrets, he'll be on vacation! 661 | * MyData panels relevant to interop? [Form](https://online2020.mydata.org/cfp-form/) 662 | * Time set - 1400, revisit in 10 weeks? 663 | * Sovrin Interop-a-thon next week - Any messages or requests to send via liaisons? (5-10min) 664 | * Full, live schedule [here](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/II/Agenda) 665 | * Anyone on the fence about signing up to lead a session that would like a less-Indy-native partner for it? 666 | * Does this group have any interop-furthering requests for the session, "**Other things we need in Indy**"? 667 | * Stack-Mapping Exercise (rest of time?) 668 | 669 | 670 |
671 | Minutes 672 | 673 | Attendees 674 | * Pam Dingle 675 | * Kaliya Identity Women 676 | * Markus Sabadello 677 | * Adrian Gropper 678 | * Bart Cant 679 | * Brent Zundel 680 | * Jonathan holt ( TranSendX ) 681 | * Carlos Rodrigues (Bloom) 682 | * H AC 683 | * John Walker 684 | * Marty Reed 685 | * Orie Steele 686 | * Sam Curren 687 | * Stephen Curran 688 | * Tim Cappalli 689 | * Yang Lu 690 | 691 | Stack-Mapping Exercise (rest of time?) 692 | 693 | * No strong arguers for MyData panel representation 694 | * Adrian: in process of putting together a proposal for an interop "badge" 695 | * Sustainable Self-Sovereign Agents program [proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZ7_Skcn4zb3zOfEu7XZDrYAmLR1T_pbBoSk8AEfrSg/edit) 696 | * Alternation of meeting time: 697 | * Strong attendance, but nobody admitted to being from AsiaPac 698 | * Welcome to 699 | * Marty from Randa solutions! 700 | * Jonathan Holt 701 | * John Walker 702 | * Indy Interop-a-thon 703 | * Everyone is welcome - but focus is on Indy topics 704 | * Actions: Find somebody to add this to the DIF calendar! 705 | * https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=36734079 706 | * Recommended: 707 | * Session on the test harness 708 | * KERI session will require homework - this is not an intro! 709 | * Good primer vid: 710 | * New work at Center for Democracy - goal to create self-asserted privacy-related statements 711 | * Contact Adrian if interested https://www.ehidc.org/resources/draft-consumer-privacy-framework-health-data 712 | 713 | * Decentralized Mapping Exercise 714 | * Using a kanban format to make it easy to collect like concepts 715 | * Comments welcome, board is here: https://whimsical.com/VVRMbTi9bPsCqagmRVNGvm 716 | 717 | Interesting links shared 718 | - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gnap/ 719 | - https://youbroketheinternet.org/map 720 | - https://www.imsglobal.org/activity/comprehensive-learner-record 721 | - https://openbadges.org/ 722 | - https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/t3-innovation-network/ilr-pilot-program 723 | - https://standards.ieee.org/project/1484_2.html 724 | -https://wiki.trezor.io/Cryptocurrency_standards#BIP39_-_Mnemonic_code_for_generating_deterministic_keys 725 | 726 |
727 | 728 | 729 | ## Agenda - 19 Aug 2020 - morning time (0600 PST) 730 | 731 | [Recording](https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/4_11PYjJqEZJR43L8l3nR6obIdrpX6a81CkXrqYPz0cq-jO2b-CIyqbkDplqEmkD) 732 | 733 | Self-Introductions and Announcements (5min) 734 | * Stephen Curran - BCGov is looking for help with headless mobile testing! Anyone with experience and tool recommendations/suggestions please reach out! 735 | 736 | 737 | ### Agenda.md / hackmd tour (10min)s 738 | ### Documentation.md tour (5min) 739 | 740 |
741 | Orie - tour of explainer.md and other work to date/ongoing inheritance (30min - got lively) 742 | 743 | 744 | * Sam Curren: tests can be gamed and used as a hammer if they're imposed unilaterally 745 | * Orie: gathering consensus and designing goals in a way that insures wide contribution 746 | * Adrian: Registry as design tool for tests and projects: align workflow with the level of effort and format of the WG-- signup, link to other work, etc (//DID:Method [registry](https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#did-methods)?) 747 | * Sankarshan: is there a vision that tests are going to be **continuous** as a design principle or more used as a test **battery** versioned to be run against specific components and stacks? In other words, how are inter-op breakage and failures flagged. 748 | * Rouven: Broader definition of interoperability -- analogy to something as specific as Aries test harness breaks down because there aren't specs equivalent to the Aries RFCs that (in the best of cases) define test vectors precisely? 749 | * Rouven + Orie: tests connected to specs > tests defined by broader, less technically-defined goals; DID-WG working on conformance tests that... work better than the prior ones (which SVIP had to rework to be more test-able) 750 | * Sam: 2 camps of testing thought in Aries community - regression tests against user behavior (community-maintained testing scripts); telecom-style swap-testing (component-testing) - complementary, not competing approaches (either in isolation carries risks: maintenance, first-mover advantage, etc) 751 | * Pam: Tooling in Aries? Sam: A little bifurcated along the above-mentioned lines; Stephan: major maintenance backlog/debt! Sam: One major contributor in each camp 752 | * Kaliya: Sorry, which camp is which? Stephen: The BCGov harness is broader and includes unit tests (98.6% coverage!); the HL one comes more from the telco style of rack-testined. 753 | * Orie: but both are integration tests looking at inputs/outputs of each piece of software as a black box (agents under test) against RFCs that outline testable conditions and normative behaviors. This is great! 754 | * Orie: Harness approach // smoketest in CI/CD terms; 755 | * Stephen: Headless mobile testing expertise warmly requested for ongoing work in the Aries test harness! 756 | 757 |
758 | 759 | ### Quick archive/issue-closing session (10min max) 760 | 761 | * Deferred to next week pending first stab at repo-cleanup for deprecated/unsupported documentation (and updating documentation.md accordingly) 762 | 763 | ### Ratify new time-slot for alternating weeks starting 26Aug. (Forgot to vote? you still [can](https://forms.gle/367khx8UvmZsjvyo9)!) 764 | 765 | ### Pre-Mapping (15min) - live screenshare from the [notion.so for the group](https://www.notion.so/dif/Interoperability-WG-a42995c37e2a4511a10aea96cdbccc38) 766 | 767 |
768 | Minutes: 769 | 770 | Generative exercise: Categories to spitball and axes of comparison/divergence: 771 | * DID & DID Formats 772 | * DID Resolution & Negotiation 773 | * Configuration/.Well-known 774 | * Credential Transport 775 | * ZKP methods 776 | * Revocation Methods 777 | * Storage mechanisms (Indy storage-driver mechanism) 778 | * Cryptographic Suites/Agility 779 | * Wallet and/or graph portability spec? 780 | 781 | Attendees: 782 | * Juan Caballero (Co-chair) 783 | * Pamela Dingle (Co-chair) 784 | * Kaliya Young (Co-chair) 785 | * Adrian Gropper (HIE of One) 786 | * Sam Curren (Aries/DIDComm) 787 | * Simone Ravaioli (Digitary) 788 | * Bart Cant (Rethink Ledgers) 789 | * Rouven Heck (ConsenSys) 790 | * Carlos Rodrigues (Bloom Protocol) 791 | * Stephen Curran (Cloud Compass) 792 | * Catherine Nabbala (Finema) 793 | * Adrian Field 794 | * Balazs Nemethi (DIF) 795 | * Bernard Joly (One Span) 796 | * James Dzierzanowski 797 | * Kristina Yesuda (Microsoft) 798 | * Sam Curren 799 | * Sam Rookard 800 | * Sankarshan 801 | * Taylor Kendal 802 | * Tim Cappalli 803 | * Troy Ronda 804 | * Hakan Yidiz 805 | * Joachim (Jolocom) 806 | * Orie (Transmute) 807 | * please add yourself if you're reading this live in the meeting! 808 | 809 |
810 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /agenda2022.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | 2 | ### 2nd of Feburary 2022 - EU Time 3 | QR Code part 2, see agenda 8th of december for context 4 | 5 | # Older meetings 6 | ### 26th of January 2022 - US Time 7 | 8 | ### 19th of January 2022 - EU Time 9 | We will have a new year kickstart discussion. Revolving recent interop movements happening the last couple of months. 10 | 11 | Preparing us for real interop for IIW 34 - April 26th-28th 12 | 13 | Our perspective on potential interop targets: 14 | We believe that it could be possible to have interop testing around JSON-LD ZKP with BBS+. 15 | We are also interested in interop around exchange protocols and seee WACI-PEX as haveing a lot of potential as the exchange protocol as it was designed to bridge between the Aries world and SVIP world. 16 | ***Lets discuss both these proposisions.*** 17 | 18 | 19 | We believe test suites should be built, how? 20 | 21 | What is needed to get to JSON-LD ZKP with BBS+ interop? Where are they bottle necks? What are the key groups that are or will be working on key parts. 22 | 23 | What is needed to get to WACI-PEX interop?Where are they bottle necks? What are the key groups that are or will be working on key parts. 24 | 25 | ### Scope 26 | * WACIPex 27 | * JSON-LD 28 | * ZKP with BBS+ 29 | 30 | #### Summary 31 | Profile of interoperability, it has been used alot of before to land something acknowledgeble. 32 | Profile are useful to drive interoperability to a flexible spec that can drive things forward. 33 | WACIPex is a profile 34 | 35 | What other profiles to others have? 36 | German community says it is a bit complex question. Issues with BBS+ signatures as of today. 37 | 38 | AIP Interoperability Testing: https://aries-interop.info/ 39 | AIP profile v1.0: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/tree/main/concepts/0302-aries-interop-profile#aries-interop-profile-version-10 40 | AIP profile v1.0: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/tree/main/concepts/0302-aries-interop-profile#aries-interop-profile-version-20 41 | 42 | See recording and chat for further intro 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | ### NEW YEAR BREAK - 12th of January 2022 47 | ### CHRISTMAS BREAK - 5th of January 2022 48 | 49 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/guest-slides/20201209-van-Deventer,-Oskar__ESSIF-LAB+DIF-Interop.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/guest-slides/20201209-van-Deventer,-Oskar__ESSIF-LAB+DIF-Interop.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/guest-slides/2021-02-030-Markus-Sabadello-Overview-of-Multi-proof VCs.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/guest-slides/2021-02-030-Markus-Sabadello-Overview-of-Multi-proof VCs.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/guest-slides/DIF-20210728.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/guest-slides/DIF-20210728.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/guest-slides/readme.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Posted by permission of the guests - please contact repo managers and/or current chairs if these need to be taken down for any reason. 2 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/iiw31guide.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # DIF Interop WG's guide to IIW 2 | 3 | This is a deliverable of the DIF Interoperability [WG](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/agenda.md), and is intended for editing in HackMD and/or GitHub issues: 4 | [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/DGeGahiYQGeIGvl-DRDE6Q/badge)](https://hackmd.io/DGeGahiYQGeIGvl-DRDE6Q) 5 | 6 | 7 | |Session Title|Convener|Recording & Notes|Topics Covered|Recommended for| 8 | |---|---|---|---|---| 9 | |Interop WG readout|Kaliya & Juan|Rec: [Youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaM0UtQTLCs)
Notes: not great
Day 1-4B|Deliverables, Q&A with participants about interop interests and projects|hardcore interop researchers| 10 | |Condatis Interop Story (?)|Chris Eckl (Condatis)|Rec: ?
Notes: good|Microsoft Authenticator/Evernym Connect.me interop work undertaken by Condatis for NHS; authentication; MIME types and openid:// versus http[s]:// prefix|People working on QR systems for passing URLs| 11 | |Not-so-smart wallets|Kim H Duffy, Darrell O'Donnell, Orie Steele|Rec: Day 3-22K
Notes: zero?|Universal Wallet Spec 2020, scope, use-cases for minimum viable wallet|Wallet and/or product designers| 12 | |Minimum Viable Wallet|Eric Welton|Not recorded
Notes: Useful |Day 1-5B [temporary link](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VwCx-NibNfxtmnLqI9e0XN9uL8XREuFhbpPvEv5En0A/edit)|Use case thinking around zero-trust hardware and smartphone-free VCs in civilian hands|People working on smartphone-free use cases| 13 | |Browsers, Privacy & Federation (Cookies, WebID, CHAPI, etc)|Sam Goto (Google, W3C WICG) et al.|Not recorded, [notes](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nNvIYO6KBSQWLAtL9MjQmCOxstg0pMZ3KTqlj5Wzchg/edit) (also notes + [slides](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xKyrWYQsTtmKle3eHbxYno2KIyrZRLi2luAcLyHZ0Ws/edit#slide=id.p) from prior session) very useful|Proposed WebID tracking system, OIDC, legacy/endangered cookies, and the W3C CHAPI protocol (comparing different ways to enable SSI and/or privacy in-browser)|People working on browser authentication, browser-based protocols, and OIDC| 14 | |SSI in Developing Countries: Product and Usability|Rachel Chang (Kiva) et al.|Day 1-6A
Rec: ??
Notes: Very good - [temporary link](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-SV_24AdKsPaJqwo07A6YfWdHgcHlbIFrtf93a5RxaU/edit)|Biometric authentication and "authorized verified" certification for Sierra Leone use case|[Thoughtful](https://thoughtfulbiometrics.org/ 15 | ) Biometricists, national-scale/government identity proofing, eKYC researchers| 16 | 17 | Trends 18 | * "Low end" of UX - can't or won't use smart phones, shared phones, etc - Realistic groundwork for realworld adoption 19 | * Eric Welton - "Minimum Viable Device" session 20 | * Level 1 Support session by André Kudra & Mawaki Chango 21 | * Ken Ebert & Sam Curren - Custodial Agents - Day 2-12F 22 | * "Custodial" - Crypto space uses "custodial" for fiduciary/confidential key mgmt (but with export capability) 23 | * Chris Buchanan (Mitre) - Hardware-based (YubiKey, say) that plugs into a "terminal" that provides UX but with external key mgmt 24 | * "Custodial" situations (guardianship situations - real-world human-to-human custodianship) 25 | * Possible terminological solution: "issuer-hosted" custodial agent **IHCA** 26 | * Kaliya: Jeff Aristy points out *legal* usage of "guardianship" is very specific (fairly international) 27 | * Kaliya: this happened with "signature" in the 90s! 28 | * Internet Bar Association - hosting [conference](https://www.techforjustice.org/ibo-summit/) on "justice layer" for internet 29 | * Biometric angle? Upcoming [conference](https://thoughtfulbiometrics.org/) 30 | * Kiva in Sierra Leone - Kiva-hosted custodial wallet has API into national biometric authority DB - people without devices can be authenticated against govt biometrics to open Kiva-hosted wallet on hardware 31 | * Sam: Fingerprint can only be enrolled at authorized terminal - certifying hardware; authorized verifiers have to be authorized before they can open a kiva wallet (or ping national db) 32 | * Kaliya: CCI [use case](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dbWvs1m8uziTsbhUQv_nPofTXAyDSkxI5CZtoo1SlRY/edit?ts=5e85430a#heading=h.l3l52qc46clk) and TNO position [paper](https://fpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/8-TNO-Bloqzone-We-need-countermeasures-against-SSI-coercion-v3.pdf) to authorize verifiers for Covid against scope creep 33 | * Sam: Machine-readable governance framework work going this direction as well 34 | * Drop-in attendance - high total numbers but lots of sporadic attendance 35 | * Gardens underattended 36 | * too many sessions when through breaks? 37 | * Zoom literacy rising, too many/long presentations - stronger recommendations next time? too much powerpoint fatigue adding to the zoom fatigue 38 | * qR and interop targets emerging from various spaces 39 | * Me: qR code/condatis session and 40 | * Sam: DIDComm v1 has some QR opinions, and DIDComm v2 has learned some lessons and has some plans for DIDComm v2 41 | * Stephen Curran: BCGov is bullish on BBS+ for ZKP - We are going to do what we can to direct funds and bounties to making BBS+ uptake faster 42 | * cryptography is only part of the problem 43 | * input requested on how to structure 44 | * Kaliya: Set a date to discuss in this group? 45 | * Sam: Yes! inviting a few people 46 | * John Walker: +1 47 | * Stephen: Everyone assumes someone is doing it, and we'd all like to find a way to chip in and speed things up 48 | * Sam: Cross-ledger revocation research 49 | * One that touches many ongoing DID-Core debates - interop might have a role there 50 | * There are only a few marginally functional revocation systems - maybe having one huge one in common would be great 51 | * Stephen: BBS+ might have better uptake if it's got a revocation system attached/built in (that's why Indy was so successful!) 52 | * Stephen: Proof request/Pres-Exch/Cred-Mani problem space also could be a multiplier - if ZKP for multi-cred presentations is thrown in, BBS+ looks a lot more worthwhile as an upgrade :D 53 | * 54 | 55 | 56 | Additional notes 57 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pptx: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/interop-mapping-version-by-Hakan-Yildiz(TUB).pptx -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-12-20.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-12-20.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-4-20.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-4-20.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-9-30-20.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-9-30-20.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/readme.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | Here is where we store permanent links to publications of the group, including working drafts of deliverables. 2 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/slides--2021-02-17--t_ronda_(SecureKey)-did-orb-spec-tour.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/slides--2021-02-17--t_ronda_(SecureKey)-did-orb-spec-tour.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/ssi-architectural-stack--and--community-efforts-overview.pdf: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/assets/ssi-architectural-stack--and--community-efforts-overview.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /assets/wallet-matrix.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Wallet Credential Format Grid - October 2020 2 | 3 | [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/t1cotiReTXCnkpDG8k2tVA/badge)](https://hackmd.io/t1cotiReTXCnkpDG8k2tVA) 4 | 5 | ### DIF Interoperability [WG](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/agenda.md) 6 | 7 | For entertainment purposes only, all claims self-attested and non-binding! 8 | 9 | --- 10 | We are trying to get a ballpark notion of which types of credentials each "wallet" can HOLD (be issued) and PRESENT (use to generate VPs). Nits: 11 | * By "wallet," we are including custodial wallets and agents, all software that can hold credentials under the control of their holder and present credentials on behalf of their holder 12 | * For the purposes of *this* document, verifying and consuming these VCs but "translating" them or storing them in another format is out of scope (although that might be a valuable thing to look into later!). 13 | * Similarly, we are not looking too closely at how interoperable each wallet is with **which** issuers or how foreign/far-afield they are-- that's a nit to be picked another day! We can add more columns later if people find that useful. 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ### Instructions: 18 | 19 | * If you have intimate knowledge of the roadmap/dev team of a wallet you feel qualified to speak about publically, 20 | * please try to fill in each credential format's columns in your wallet's row using the following legend ONLY (no text) 21 | * if you would like to add text, please do it as a hackmd footnote like this[^footnote1]. 22 | * If you do not have such knowledge and authority, but you know someone who does, please forward this URL to them! 23 | 24 | ### LEGEND: 25 | Y = Our wallet currently can hold and present these cred formats in a way that we feel is 100% conformant 26 | S = Soon (already in development) 27 | P = Partial support: 28 | * some specified features missing, and/or 29 | * specified features implemented in an off-spec way 30 | * no decision yet on when/whether to address the above. if decided, use PR or PX. 31 | 32 | PR = Partial support, the rest is on our roadmap 33 | PX = Partial support, and no plans to implement the rest and/or conform to spec 34 | R = Roadmapped but not currently in development 35 | N = No decision 36 | X = Planning NOT to support this format 37 | ! = None of your business, DIF! 38 | ? = No definitive information could yet be confirmed or denied from governing organization. If a cell contains another symbol and a ?, consider it an unconfirmed rumor! 39 | 40 | ### THE MAIN EVENT 41 | 42 | |VC Creds: | LD-Proofs (i.e. VCs in conformant LD) | VC-JWTs | AnonCreds | BBS+ | 43 | |---|---|---|---|---| 44 | | fine print: | VCs stored in conformant LD | VCs in Vanilla JSON | tooling for Indy-based Linked Secrets | LD-based ZKP presentation-enabled (independent of Indy support) | 45 | |Transmute |Y |? |? |? | 46 | |Veres Wallet |Y |X |X |N | 47 | |Affinity |Y |? |? |? | 48 | |Consensys D.A.F. |PR |Y |N |R | 49 | |[uPort Serto](https://ecosystems.uport.me/) |? |? |? |? | 50 | |[Minerva](https://twitter.com/MinervaWallet) |R |Y |X |N | 51 | |MSFT Authenticator |PR|Y |X?|N?| 52 | |[evan.network](https://evan.network/)/[Trust&Trace](https://trust-trace.com/en/home/) |Y |N |Y |R | 53 | |Jolocom |Y |? |? |? | 54 | |Gataca |Y |Y |N |R | 55 | |JLinc/MyData Commons |? |? |? |? | 56 | |ArcBlock |Y |Y |X |P | 57 | |[RANDA](https://randasolutions.com/the-wallet-by-randa/) |Y |Y |N |R | 58 | | |? |? |? |? | 59 | |[IdentityWallet](https://ceramic.network) |N |Y |N |N | 60 | |[tykn.tech](https://tykn.tech/ana/) |? |? |? |? | 61 | |Credible |S |? |? |S | 62 | |Swisscom Blockchain |? |? |? |R?| 63 | |GlobalID |? |? |Y |R | 64 | |Mattr |Y |? |? |Y | 65 | |Trinsic |R |? |Y |R | 66 | |[Kiva](https://github.com/kiva/protocol-demo/)[^footnotekiva] |R |R |Y |R | 67 | |Connect.me |N?|N?|Y |R | 68 | |Lissi |N |N |Y |R | 69 | |SeLF (esatus) |? |? |Y |R | 70 | |[Aries Cloud Agent](https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-cloudagent-python) |PR|N |Y |R | 71 | |[Business Partner Agent](https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/business-partner-agent) |P |? |Y |? | 72 | |Spherity|Y[^footnotespherity] |Y|P|R| 73 | |VIDchain |Y|PR|R|R| 74 | |[WayTo by Workday](http://mywayto.com/)|Y[^footnoteworkday]|N|N|N| 75 | |DCC Wallet |Y|N|N|R| 76 | 77 | ### Notes from discussion 10/7/20 78 | 79 | Ideas for future columns or future charts 80 | * Human versus non-human subjects/holders? 81 | * Agents versus wallets-- bracketable for now? 82 | * Nomenclature: stop calling it anoncreds2, Juan! 83 | * 84 | 85 | ### Footnotes 86 | [^footnote1]: This is how footnotes work in hackMD. Each footnote has to have a unique name, but you can link to them in multiple places! 87 | 88 | [^footnotespherity]: Somewhere between Y and PR! Our homegrown LD implementation is a little undertested but seems to work fine. Aligning with Mattr's linter and Transmute's Document-Loader is roadmapped! 89 | 90 | [^footnotekiva]: We currently only support anonymous credentials, but are accepting PRs! 91 | 92 | [^footnoteworkday]: We do not use JSON-LD but use LD-style proofs. We use a plain JSON solution without JWTs. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/InteropProject.png: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/docs/InteropProject.png -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/README.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | #### [View on GitHub](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability) 2 | 3 | ## [Explainer](./explainer.md) 4 | 5 | ## [Endorsements](./endorsements.md) 6 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/_config.yml: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | title: [Interoperability Project] 2 | description: 3 | [ 4 | A continious technical demonstration of interoperability between DID Methods, 5 | Wallets, 6 | Agents, 7 | Encrypted Data Vaults, 8 | and Verifiable Credentials., 9 | ] 10 | # google_analytics: [Your Google Analytics tracking ID] 11 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/favicon.ico: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/990598b1f88998a7d9255c7e7df3cd29e4c544aa/docs/chapi/favicon.ico -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/index.html: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Minimal Dev Wallet 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
22 |
23 |
Credential Handler API Demo (Issuer)
24 |

Back to Github/README.md

25 |

26 | By clicking 'Accept' on page load, you have registered this page with your 27 | browser, and now it can act as a test wallet. 28 |

29 |

30 | You can now test the Credential Handler API by requesting to be issued a 31 | credential, below. 32 |

33 |
34 |
35 | 36 |
37 |
38 |
39 |
40 |
41 |
Test Issuance
42 | 43 |

This is a minimal credential Issuer application that demonstrates 44 | how a user would ask for a credential to be issued 45 | (using CHAPI's store() under the hood). 46 |

47 | 48 |

When you click the Receive button, a Verifiable Credential will 49 | be issued and sent to your digital wallet for storage. 50 |

51 | 52 | Receive a Credential 53 |
54 |
55 |
56 |
57 |
58 |

59 | This is the Credential that gets issued (wrapped in a 60 | VerifiablePresentation by the issuer), 61 | and will be sent to the wallet: 62 |

63 | 106 |
107 |
108 |
109 | 110 |
111 | Results of Receiving Credential via store(): 112 | 113 |

114 |         
115 |
116 |
117 |
118 |
119 | 120 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/install.js: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | /*! 2 | * Copyright (c) 2019 Digital Bazaar, Inc. All rights reserved. 3 | */ 4 | /* global navigator, window, document */ 5 | 'use strict'; 6 | 7 | const workerUrl = 'https://identity.foundation/interoperability/chapi/worker.html' 8 | 9 | async function installHandler() { 10 | console.log('Loading polyfill...'); 11 | 12 | try { 13 | await credentialHandlerPolyfill.loadOnce(); 14 | } catch(e) { 15 | console.error('Error in loadOnce:', e); 16 | } 17 | 18 | console.log('Polyfill loaded.'); 19 | // document.getElementById('loadingText').innerHTML = 'Polyfill loaded.'; 20 | 21 | const registration = await WebCredentialHandler 22 | .installHandler({url: workerUrl}) 23 | 24 | await registration.credentialManager.hints.set( 25 | 'test', { 26 | name: 'TestUser', 27 | enabledTypes: ['VerifiablePresentation', 'VerifiableCredential', 'AlumniCredential'] 28 | }); 29 | } 30 | 31 | function ready(fn) { 32 | if (document.readyState !== 'loading'){ 33 | fn(); 34 | } else { 35 | document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', fn); 36 | } 37 | } 38 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/wallet-ui-receive.html: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Minimal Dev Wallet - Wallet Store UI 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
Wallet UI (demo)
21 | 22 |

As an Issuer, you have no control over what this UI looks like.

23 | 24 |
Would you like to store this Credential?
25 |

26 | When the user is issued a credential, the wallet confirms this operation 27 | with the user. 28 |

29 | 30 |

31 | When you click Store, this Credential will be stored in your 32 | digital wallet. 33 |

34 |
35 | 36 | 37 | 38 |
39 |
40 |
41 | 84 | 85 | Store Credential 86 |
87 |
88 |
89 | 90 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/wallet-ui-store.html: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Minimal Dev Wallet - Wallet Store UI 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
store() event
21 |
22 |
23 | Reply:
24 | 25 | 26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 | from: 31 |
32 |
33 | hint key: 34 |
35 |
36 |
37 |

38 |   
39 |
40 | 41 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/chapi/worker.html: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Minimal Dev Wallet - Worker 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 35 | 36 | 37 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/endorsements.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Interoperability Endorsements 2 | 3 | Members of decentralized identity communities, such as W3C, DIF, HyperLedger, etc... may be familar with the rapidly evolving nature of specifications, working groups and concrete implementations. 4 | 5 | In an effort to focus the technical demonstrations of interoperability, we are experimenting with the concept of an "Interoperability Endorsement". 6 | 7 | The intention is to draw attention to specific specifications and implementations that support interoperability and that are leveraged in the technical Proof Of Concepts contained in this repository. 8 | 9 | In order for an an endorsement to be given the following criterial SHOULD be met: 10 | 11 | 1. There exists a publicly accessible, open source contributable, specification of the concept. 12 | 2. There exists at least a single concrete implementation of the technology, which is also publically accessible and open source contribution ready. 13 | 3. There exists a demonstration of interoperability (prefferably in functioning code). 14 | 15 | Endorsements are not limited to repos within the communities mentioned above. 16 | 17 | ## Current Endorsements 18 | 19 | ### [The Universal Resolver](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/universal-resolver) 20 | 21 | - [DID Resolution Spec](https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-resolution/) 22 | 23 | ### [Verifiable Credentials Data Model](https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/) 24 | 25 | See examples in [projects](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/tree/master/projects) 26 | 27 | - [JOSE ES256K](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/lds-ecdsa-secp256k1-2019.js) 28 | 29 | Pending contribution / demonstration: 30 | 31 | - [vc-js](https://github.com/digitalbazaar/vc-js) 32 | - [did-jwt-vc](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/did-jwt-vc) 33 | - [did-auth-jose](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/did-auth-jose) 34 | 35 | Discussions: 36 | 37 | - [#5](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/issues/5) 38 | 39 | ### [OIDC SIOP](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/papers/blob/master/did-authn/siop/did-authn-siop-profile.md) 40 | 41 | Pending contribution / demonstration: 42 | 43 | TODO: Add demonstration. 44 | 45 | Discussions: 46 | 47 | [#11](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/issues/11) 48 | 49 | ### [Well Known DID Configuration](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/.well-known) 50 | 51 | - [Well Known DID Configuration Spec](https://identity.foundation/.well-known/resources/did-configuration/) 52 | 53 | Demonstration: 54 | 55 | - [PWA Demo](https://identity.foundation/.well-known/resources/did-configuration/demo/build/index.html) 56 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /docs/explainer.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # InterOp Explainer 2 | 3 | ## Mission 4 | 5 | The mission of the InterOp Project is to demonstrate interoperability amongst the specifications and implementations within the Decentralized Identity community, including non DIF members. Contributors focus on code and documentation, with a particular focus on supporting complements and substitutes to the technologies they may be developing within their host company or other working groups. 6 | 7 | ## Scope 8 | 9 | The InterOp project does manage standards or specifications and relies on working groups within the DIF, W3C, Bitcoin, Ethereum, HyperLedger, and elsewhere. The interop project does not develop cipher suites or data format libraries, but we do build proof of concepts and demos. If a technology is not mature enough for use by other members of the community, the interop project may provide software shims or stubs to demonstrate interoperability. 10 | 11 | ## Credential Exchange CLI Demo 12 | 13 | We provide a command line tool for demonstrating the creation, resolution and use of decentralized identifiers and verifiable credentials. [Learn More](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/tree/master/projects/cli-demo). 14 | 15 | ## Credential Exchange Web Demo 16 | 17 | We are developing a web demo for credential issuance and exchange. We aim to support Mobile Wallets, Agents, Hubs and at least 3 DID Methods. Please see the [open issues](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/issues) for more details. 18 | 19 | ### Technology Summary 20 | 21 | Subject to change, we don't need to demonstrate interoperability everwhere. 22 | 23 | | | Issuer | Subject | Verifier | 24 | | ---------- | ------ | ------- | -------- | 25 | | DID Method | BTCR | Various | TBD | 26 | | AuthN | YES | NO | MAYBE | 27 | | Sign VC | YES | YES | MAYBE | 28 | | Verify VC | YES | YES | YES | 29 | | Hubs | NO | YES | NO | 30 | | Agents | NO | YES | NO | 31 | | Mobile | NO | YES | NO | 32 | | Website | YES | NO | YES | 33 | 34 | - [Block Diagram](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BK-qVM1y9594viC_uhOrpx1Vozun1tsr/view) 35 | 36 | 37 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /documentation.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Interoperability WG Documentation Guidelines 2 | 3 | [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw/badge)](https://hackmd.io/K5BWQ_rvSTKJ-BxeWINYfw) 4 | 5 | [**Homepage of WG**](https://identity.foundation/inteorperability/) | [**Issues**](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/issues) | [**Meeting Recordings/Transcripts**](https://dif.groups.io/g/interop-wg) 6 | 7 | ## Agendas and minutes 8 | 9 | Agendas for future meetings and minutes of past meetings are assembled in a running [document](agenda.md) in the root of the group's github repository. It is "live-edited" during workinggroup meetings (turning that meeting's agenda into minutes) in a collaboration tool that supports markdown and simultaneous editing (at time of press, that's hackmd.io). 10 | 11 | Although the group is not IPR protected and is entirely open to the public, we still strive to create an environment of respect and attribution, so if you feel the chairs are not crediting speakers or putting enough detail into the minutes, attendees are encouraged to contribute, embellish the minutes with links, fix typos, etc etc. 12 | 13 | ## Archival multi-media completeness 14 | 15 | When in-meeting discussion involves screensharing videos, images, slideshows, task boards, diagrams, etc, we will do our best to get a copy of these files and upload them to the archival record of the group by copying these input documents to the /assets/ folder where appropriate and linking to them from the minutes. As above, feel free to email the chairs if you notice an oversight or a lapse in this policy! 16 | 17 | ## Recordings of meetings 18 | 19 | As per DIF general policy, all meetings should be recorded and hosting on DIF web space to allow members and non-members alike to watch them at their leisure. The link above should lead you to the recordings to date. 20 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /parking-lot.md: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | # Discussion Items for next Chairs meeting 2 | * We have source for demos and proofs of concepts, the most recent substantive change being Feb 2020 across all of them. 3 | We are continuously getting security warnings from GitHub because of issues with these projects. 4 | We should externalize code projects in our repo (and likely archive). DW is reaching out to authors to determine if they prefer another option (such as pointing to a maintained authoritative version, or investigate creating a work item for it underneath the Interop WG) 5 | * (done) Talked with Orie, agreed they should just be deleted. The projects actually predate the formation of the WG, so they likely have ambiguous IPR. 6 | * Go over core documentation in our repo to remove things which are not a focus/not true anymore 7 | * Replace main "notion" page for Interop WG with content either on the DIF page or Github main page 8 | * Create a skeleton agenda for meetings, e.g. 9 | * Call to order 10 | * Current meeting topic and agenda 11 | * Announcement of future interoperability meetings and recap of previous week 12 | * (Call for) announcements of other interoperability-related topics 13 | * Main meeting agenda 14 | * DW: Status on PoC of github infrastructure revisions 15 | 16 | # "Parking lot" for future/recurring agenda items 17 | 18 | ## Fresh topics 19 | 20 | * Kaliya: WACI what WACI how? 21 | * IIW Discussion on what we want to do there and potentially cancelling the meeting that week, or merge into agenda at IIW. 22 | * IIW interop AMA session, what can we do to make things better for the community 23 | * DIDComm realease on IIW, do we want to play off of that? 24 | 25 | ## Educational presentations 26 | 27 | * Disposable Identities (Adam Burns is on the hook) 28 | * Revocable Anonymity 29 | * What the heck is a synthetic identity? (Michael Shea is up to date on fraud research) - Ping Identity might want to speak to it? or Jan Lindquist's privacy and risk WG in ToIP 30 | * Interop liabilities and new attack surfaces 31 | * VC Auth versus ZCap-LD (CCG), ACDC TF (& some day spec?) ToIP - 32 | * x509 worldwide - Finema, Spherity, Discipl, ...? 33 | * eIDAS roundtable - Nacho Alamillo, Gataca, Peter Wagner, Erik van Zuuren...? 34 | * EDV Use Cases v2 - Manu? 35 | * Cloud Wars and [Gaia-X](https://www.gaia-x.eu/) - ...? 36 | * What's the BlueSky of LinkedIn? EuroPass, Affinidi, LER... 37 | * Ongoing interop efforts 38 | - `JWS test suite` - https://blog.identity.foundation/dif-grant-1-jws-test-suite/ 39 | - `vc-jwt-interop` - https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues/198 40 | - `VC-HTTP-API` - 41 | - Aries-interop.info - 42 | 43 | ## Meta-topics, potential quarter-wide or year-long goals 44 | 45 | * Venn diagram of interop goals, and scopes/definitions of interop (contextual) 46 | * Don't lose focus on the map model! [link](https://github.com/decentralized-identity/decentralized-identity.github.io/blob/master/assets/crosscommunity-architecture-survey-oct-2020.pdf) 47 | * Parallelize (and promote) interop work on totally different scopes 48 | * Proposed Work Item: **Architectural guidelines**: "if your role in the ecosystem includes X, looks at ABC specs and make sure you speak D and F to maximize interoperability (and/or future-compatibility)" 49 | * Incorporate/consider [ToIP TIPs](https://github.com/trustoverip/technology-stack-wg/blob/master/TIP_LIFECYCLE_MANAGEMENT.md) and [OIX interop study](https://twitter.com/pamelarosiedee/status/1339223733303570432) 50 | * Human-centric interop as roadmap and business strategy (+ UX?) 51 | * Further afield usecases (VC-free, DID-free, human-free, LEI, etc) 52 | * Non-human decentralized identity? 53 | * Interop test suites and harness infrastructure (after March when SVIP/CCG interop sprint ends) 54 | * Notary models and adoption hacks? (governance?) 55 | 56 | * VCs versus VPs - is habituating individuals to exchanging strong credentials a dark pattern per se? how to keep VPs ephermal and useless to traffic analysis? 57 | * Revocable anonymity? Court orders? 58 | * Adrian's question: do too many VC mental models and specs *assume* VCs going straight from issuer to holder, never issuer to verifier on direct behalf of holder? 59 | * Periodic checkins on the multi-ledger (and possible multi-method!?) Indyverse 60 | 61 | * --- **TEST SUITEAPALOOZA 2020** --- [**F2F? align with SVIP and/or ESSIF?**] 62 | * Later in December? 63 | * Status update on SVIP's past and future suite maintenance 64 | * Aries and/or BCGov test suites 65 | * Can someone from Danube or IBM show the smoke tests run against driver updates to the universal resolver? 66 | * Any volunteers have internal compliance/smoke tests they want to show? (A quick video recording would also be great if timezones are brutal!) 67 | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------