Facebook announced the creation of a cryptocurrency named Libra. Running on a permissioned blockchain, the governance model is backed by The Libra Association, composed of Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, Uber, Spotify and several others.
Libra will be exchangeable via Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger and it will allow for payments in “offline” locations.
According to the Associations’ website, its mission is to create “a simple global currency and financial infrastructure that empowers billions of people”. This includes, as they mention, the 1.7 billion unbanked.
In theory, Libra could provide a useful solution to all those with difficult access to money and banking services. People such as the unbanked, refugees or displaced people who lost access to those services. As Tykn’s CEO, Tey Al-Rjula, has stated several times: “in aid, time is lives”. Some people cannot wait for Monday to access funds because banks do not work during the weekends.
Why Libra may only be effective with the well established and leave out the marginalised they proposed themselves to help
Many things are still to be understood and clarified prior to its 2020 release but one thing is certain: to use Libra, a verification with a government issued ID will have to be made. But this won’t solve the problem of the unbanked and the refugees. Globally, 1.2 billion people do not have an identity recognised by a sovereign state. Either because they never had one in the first place or because their identity was lost due to inefficient identity registration procedures, wars or disasters. A case such as Tykn’s CEO who, at the age of 5, had his birth certificate destroyed because the birth registries in Kuwait were burnt during the Gulf War. Many of the unbanked and the refugees The Libra Association (and Facebook) want to help are the same who don’t own the necessary identifying document that will allow them to use Libra. Identity, the missing layer that already prevents these people from accessing services such as healthcare, education or banks, will again be the problem.
Within Libra’s Whitepaper, the only mention to identity is a vague statement: “An additional goal of the association is to develop and promote an open identity standard. We believe that decentralized and portable digital identity is a prerequisite to financial inclusion and competition”. This does not offer any indication of how The Libra Association is planning on including the unidentified.
How could then Libra help the unbanked and the refugees?
By implementing Self-Sovereign Identity principles and allowing for trusted organisations within the Libra ecosystem to issue Verifiable Credentials.
If a trusted NGO within the Libra Association could issue a Verifiable Credential to, say, a refugee, the other organisations in the Libra ecosystem would be able to trust that credential without even having to check the actual data contained within it. They would only need to use the blockchain used for the identity infrastructure (one such as Sovrin) to check the validity of the attestation and attesting party (such as that NGO) from which they can determine whether to validate and accept the credential.
Each user would keep his own data, those Verifiable Credentials, on his own personal digital identity wallet. Private and secure.
The innovative technology of Self-Sovereign Identities would allow trust between all the parties within the Association, while guaranteeing the authenticity of the credentials and the privacy and security of users. No personal data would be stored on any blockchain, or centralised servers, and each user would be the single owner of their own data.
If you’re part of an organisation and wondering how you could issue private and secure verifiable credentials on blockchain, click here.
Digital Identity and Self-Sovereign Identity are some of the most exciting fields in technology and innovation right now. We round up a list of 10 Digital Identity experts that you should follow if you want to be up to date on all the cutting edge developments in this space.
Christopher Allen is a Blockchain & Decentralized Identity Architect, Internet Cryptography Pioneer and co-author of the TLS Security Standard.
Allen wrote the influential The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity text in which he shares his “vision for how we can enhance the ability of digital identity to enable trust while preserving individual privacy”.
“Self-Sovereign Identity is the next step beyond user-centric identity and that means it begins at the same place: the user must be central to the administration of identity. That requires not just the interoperability of a user’s identity across multiple locations, with the user’s consent, but also true user control of that digital identity, creating user autonomy. To accomplish this, a self-sovereign identity must be transportable; it can’t be locked down to one site or locale.” – The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity
Kim Cameron is the former Chief Architect of Identity at Microsoft. Cameron wrote the seminal paper The Laws of Identity which aims to highlight the problem of the Internet having been built without means to know who and what we are connecting to and its possible solutions. He is described by Phil Windley, Chairman of the Sovrin Foundation as a “being from the future” as his 2005 Laws of Identity are only now being understood.
“Digital identity requires (…) a unifying identity metasystem that can protect applications from the internal complexities of specific implementations and allow digital identity to become loosely coupled. This metasystem is in effect a system of systems that exposes a unified interface much like a device driver or network socket does. That allows one-offs to evolve towards standardized technologies that work within a metasystem framework without requiring the whole world to agree a priori.” – The Laws of Identity
Drummond Reed is Evernym’s Chief Trust Officer. Evernym was born to solve the problem of siloed identity. Massive databases of personal data that become honey pots for hackers and liabilities for the database owners. The solution? An identity each one of us can own. A Self-Sovereign Identity.
Reed was also the co-founder and co-author of the Respect Trust Framework, which was honored with the Privacy Award at the 2011 European Identity Conference.
Evernym are the inventors and original Founding Steward of Sovrin, the global public network enabling portable and private digital identity for all. Tykn is proudly one of Sovrin’s Stewards.
What Self-Sovereign Identity “means is that every digital relationship you have will be unique, private, and secure. There is no need to log in “with” anybody. This is a new type of relationship that has never been possible before and it is set to revolutionize the way that we interact with each other online.” – Why Login at all?
Heather Vescent is, in her words, “obsessed with this new technology”, Self-Sovereign Identity, that uses identity standards that will allow for interoperability. For her, digital identity is a base layer where everything else is built on top and people are now starting to realise its importance. According to Heather, banking, healthcare and Internet applications have been building their own siloed identity solutions that are not interoperable between each other and Self-Sovereign Identity can change that.
Heather Vescent owns and operates a foresight and strategic intelligence consultancy and co-authored Your Guide to Self-Sovereign Identity with our next person you should follow, Kaliya Young.
Kaliya, aka Identity Woman, has “committed her life to the development of an open standards based layer of the internet that empowers people”.
Her masters report, Domains of Identity, is a framework that explains the 16 domains of identity and how Self-Sovereign Identity can essentially change the relationships within those domains. Kaliya has a Master of Science in Identity Management and Security and has been named one of the most influential women in tech by the Fast Company Magazine.
“To get to this future we need to coordinate the development of common building blocks: code, infrastructure and protocol. We must ship interoperable products. And we need to work towards alignment, not control.” – The Domains of Identity Presentation
Phil Windley is the chairman of the Sovrin Foundation as well as the co-founder and organizer of the Internet Identity Workshop. He served as CIO for the State of Utah and holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of California.
“Because there’s no central authority controlling DIDs and because people can issue private DIDs themselves, they constitute a truly decentralized means of not only creating identifiers, but using them for mutual authentication, privacy preservation, and secure communication of almost any information parties need to share.” – Decentralized Identifiers
Kim Hamilton Duffy is the CTO of Learning Machine and Principal Architect of Blockcerts (that collaborated with the MIT Media Lab to develop an open standard for issuing and verifying credentials on a blockchain). She also co-chairs the W3C Credentials Community Group and is a member of the Rebooting Web of Trust board and the Steering Committee for the Decentralized Identity Foundation.
“It is time to evolve data management paradigms from those based on a centralized web architecture to those functioning from the decentralized web. Only in this way can individual self-sovereignty be guaranteed in a world where centralized authorities exert irreversibly amplifying control over digital infrastructures, and security breaches will only become more common.” – The Time for Self-Sovereign Identity Is Now
Kim is also a researcher at the “Digital Credentials Initiative” at the MIT.
Michiel van der Veen is the Director of Innovation & Development at the National Office for Identity Data in the Ministry of the Interior of The Netherlands. He is also an identification, biometrics and privacy-by-design expert for the ID4D program at the World Bank Group.
“In addition to digital ID, Biometric ID methods are also promising in poor and developing countries where scores of people still go unregistered. According to the World Bank, nearly a billion people are still unable to prove their identity, and millions more have forms of identification that cannot be reliably verified or authenticated.” –Privacy-by-design leads the way in keeping your online identity safe
Tim Bouma is a Senior Policy Analyst focused on Identity Management for the Treasury Board Secretariat of the Government of Canada.
“My belief that humans still need to be involved in that first-time or “origin” registration of creating the digital identity and linking to the real person. This is the hardest part of creating a digital identity. This origin registration may be an expensive and inconvenient process to carry out, but with the value (and potential harm) associated with it — a digital identity that is, or not, under your control — the fully digital alternatives may be too risky (today, at least). However, once that origin registration is carried out, your digital identity can be easily assured on an ongoing basis, using cryptography, verifiable claims, etc. But that digital identity, to be trusted, must be traceable back to that origin registration.” –Digital Identity – the hardest part
Darrell O’Donnell is the CTO at CULedger and Technical Advisor to multiple top-level agencies, departments, and services (including Canada’s and the US’ public safety and homeland security department) in the fields of blockchain and digital identity.
“Here’s the funny thing – we’re realizing that companies never really needed to own our digital identity. They did it out of necessity. Businesses are beginning to figure out what this means – and those that are wrapping their heads around blockchain identity are poised to succeed. The best are realizing that Blockchain Identity, particularly Self Sovereign Identity, is shifting the business view of digital identity. Digital identity is shifting to become a revenue driver, cost cutter, and even an asset.” – Blockchain Identity for Dummies
Last Thursday, cyclone Idai left a devastating trail in Mozambique. With more than 400 deaths accounted for, the International Red Cross estimates more than 400.000 people were left homeless. The United Nations is describing it as “the worst climate disaster ever in the southern hemisphere”.
The Red Cross teams on sight are distributing shelter supplies to affected families and chlorine tablets to purify the water. Diseases transmitted by contaminated water are one of the biggest concerns in case of a catastrophe where normal water supplies are interrupted.
“Many families have lost everything” according to the Red Cross spokesperson, Jamie LeSueur. If they also lost their documents or if the governmental identification processes have been compromised, not being able to prove who they are can cause irreparable damage to their short term survival.
Mozambique has the third highest smartphone adoption rate in the African continent (sources 1, 2 and 3) meaning that digital identities could play a pivotal role in easing people’s suffering in a natural catastrophe scenario. This is how:
1) Aid expedition
Humanitarian aid distribution – whether shelter, food or cash based assistance – requires a strong identification layer. How else could an NGO account for what aid has been distributed and to whom?
Current identity management systems are paper-based and make this process reliant on vouchers. Paper vouchers. This not only slows the aid distribution process – and in a scenario like this time is lives – but it also jeopardizes the quality of aid provided. If a citizen is to lose their voucher they would have to start the aid request process all over again. Worse: unfortunately it is quite common, in a scenario like this, that vouchers are stolen or subject to fraud. In a paper-based system, NGOs have no means to efficiently combat wrongful behaviours.
Digital identities will provide an efficient way for an affected person to request aid. A trusted organisation can quickly issue a digital credential that verifies that person’s identity and allows them faster access to their services. All vouchers are digitised and, alongside the identity credentials, are held in a digital identity wallet in that person’s mobile device. Digital vouchers can’t be lost or stolen and provide an NGO with important and reliable information about who has been aided.
In catastrophe scenarios like this, the people affected are often displaced to another city or country. They become refugees. Not being able to prove who they are prevents them from accessing services like healthcare, education or banking and excludes them from society.
The innovative technology of Self-Sovereign Identity allows for a trusted organisation such as the government or an NGO to issue a digital credential attesting to that person’s identity. Through the use of distributed ledger technology that credential is verified with a signature from that organisation. A signature that cannot be deleted or subject to fraud.
When verifying a persons’ affected identity, the verifier does not need to verify the accuracy of the data contained in the credential. The verifying party will validate the issuers’ signature who issued and attested to this credential to then decide whether he trusts the issuers’ assessment about the accuracy of the data.
A process like this, that eliminates the possibility of identity fraud and where everyone in the network has the same source of truth about which credentials are still valid and who attested to the validity of the data inside the credential (without revealing the actual data) will speed and facilitate identification processes between governmental departments and between governments. Accounting for less bureaucracy, less need fordata management and possible frauds.
Above all, this will ease people’s suffering as it will allow them to quickly access services, such as healthcare or banking, and be included in society again. Their identities and their access to human rights are protected. Right there on their mobile devices.
Current identity management systems have privacy and security problems. And blockchain technology may be the solution for them. On this blog we examine what blockchain is, what benefits it brings to identity management, the role of cryptography and zero-knowledge proofs, what Self-Sovereign Identity is, why it’s a terrible idea to put personal data on the blockchain and much more.
Let’s dive in.
What is Blockchain?
Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), commonly simply called “Blockchain Technology”, refers to the technology behind decentralised databases providing control over the evolution of data between entities through a peer-to-peer network, using consensus algorithms that ensure replication across the nodes of the network.
More simply put:
Imagine a book (or ledger) that anyone could obtain, free of charge, where anything written on its pages would be there forever, and at the same time, would be cross-referenced with the other books to check whether what was written to be valid and true; this is the essence of DLT.
Why was Blockchain created?
Digital assets have a problem. How does one avoid that an asset, such as digital money, is copied and used by several people? That was a problem that always plagued the adoption of digital currency.
Banks allow trust between people exchanging funds. The bank withdraws the funds from person A and assures it’s deposited on B’s account. Both parties trust the bank to perform the operation.
But if one intended to create an ecosystem where there is not a single entity controlling the flow of information, where a user could send money directly to another user without it going through a central entity, this was a problem. How could the people involved in this financial system trust that the money had left A’s account and deposited on B’s? How could it be avoided that this digital money was copied and double (or triple) spent by A?
This problem was solved by the person, or entity, known as Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008.
Why is a Blockchain secure?
What makes blockchain secure is the fact that each block where data is recorded cannot be changed retroactively without the consensusof the majority of the network. Meaning that for a piece of information to be changed, all the blocks created after it would have to be changed and 51% of the network would have to agree on that change. Since blocks are being created every moment, changing those and the blocks preceding it until reaching the one we intended to change, would require enormous computing power.
Satoshi created blockchain to solve the double-spend problem of digital currency and to act as a ledger, a registry, of the transactions of Bitcoin. Each person that transacts Bitcoin acts as a node in the network, registering a transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain. This makes it decentralized, as no central authority is needed and each person in the network can write on the ledger, and allows for consensus in the network without the need of a middle-man. The more people are in the network, the more difficult it is for a majority collusion in order to subvert the veracity of the information on the blockchain.
With a public, immutable, registry, managed by collaboration and collective altruism, this digital currency users could easily verify transactions and be assured that the funds were being transferred only once and not digitally copied infinitely.
A Blockchain is also considered a system with high Byzantine Fault tolerance. A Byzantine Fault is an occurrence on decentralized systems where it may appear, for one user, that the system is working perfectly and, to others, that the system is failing.
How does a Blockchain work?
The units where information are registered, the “pages” of this ledger, are blocks. Each block contains hashed information.
A hash is a function widely used in cryptography. It’s a mathematical algorithm that transforms a piece of information into a string of alphanumeric values: the “hash” or “hash value”. If the same information is introduced in the input, it will always deliver the same hash in the output. If there’s even the slightest change in the input information, the output hash will be widely different (this is known as the avalanche effect). Avoiding any correlation between hashes.
It’s a “one way function” because using the hash value in the output to find what was the information in the input is extremely difficult.
An Example of the hash and how the avalanche effect alters the output with even the slightest change in the input. (Graph Source)
Each block is linked to the next block through a cryptographic hash, and so one. Creating a chain. Thus, the blockchain.
Permissioned or Permissionless Blockchains
Blockchains can be Permissioned or Permissionless.
Permissionless, like the most digital currency blockchains, allow all users to write on the ledger. There’s no permission needed from anyone to become a node on the network.
To become a node on a Permissioned blockchains, one would need authorization from one or several parties. An example of a Permissioned Blockchain is the Sovrin one. Sovrin is governed by a set of Stewards who act as nodes. This is done to preserve the integrity of the information, in this case related to digital identity, that is written on the ledger. Stewards are trusted and vetted by The Sovrin Foundation.
What is Identity Management?
Also known as “identity and access management”, or IAM, identity management comprises all the processes and technologies within an organisation that are used to identify, authenticate and authorize someone to access services or systems in that said organisation or other associated ones.
Examples of this would range from customers and/or employees accessing software or hardware inside a company/enterprise – and the level of access, privileges and restrictions each user has while doing so – or, in a governmental setting, the issuing and verification of birth certificates, national id cards, passports or driver’s licenses (that allow a user/citizen to not only prove his identity but also access services from the government and other organisations).
The problem with current Identity Management Systems
Most of the current identity management systems are weak and outdated. Paper-based systems are at risk of loss, destruction or fraud. Digital systems, if centralised, are honeypots of personal data for hackers. Constantly subject to leaks and breaches. Since 2017 alone, more than 600 million personal details – such as addresses or credit card numbers – have been hacked, leaked or breached from organisations
Identities need to be portable and verifiable everywhere, any time, and digitization can enable that. But being digital is not enough. Identities also need to be private and secure.
Several industries suffer the problems of current identity management systems:
– Government: The lack of interoperability between departments and government levels takes a toll in the form of excess bureaucracy. Which, in turn, increases processes’ times and costs.
– Healthcare: half of the world’s population does not have access to quality healthcare. The lack of interoperability between actors in the healthcare space (Hospitals, clinics, insurance companies, doctors, pharmacies, etc) leads to inefficient healthcare and delayed care and frustration for patients.
– Education: It is estimated that two hundred thousand fake academic certificates are sold each year in the USA alone. The difficulty in verifying the authenticity of these credentials leads to hiring of unqualified professionals, brand damage to the universities and the hiring companies.
– Banking: the need for login details such as passwords decreases the security of banking for users.
– Businesses in general: the current need to store clients’ and employees’ personal data is a source of liability for companies. As a breach or leak of these records could mean huge fines (i.e. GDPR).
Whenever we need to prove something about ourselves – either our name, address or passport number – there is a process of authentication. A verifying entity confirms that the data we are claiming about ourselves is true or false. This is usually done through the verification of our identifying documents.
These identity verification and authentication processes make privacy concerns arise. Should a verifying entity requesting me to prove my name with my passport have access to the remaining information contained in my document while they are looking at it to verify that information? Does an entity that request a proof of my age need to know the day and month I was born?
An identity management system that uses Zero-Knowledge Proofs
A Zero-Knowledge Proof is a method of authentication that, through the use of cryptography, allows one entity to prove to another entity that they know a certain information or meet a certain requirement without having to disclose any of the actual information that supports that proof. The entity that verifies the proof has thus “zero knowledge” about the information supporting the proof but is “convinced” of its validity. This is especially useful when and where the prover entity does not trust the verifying entity but still has to prove to them that he knows a specific information.
In an identity management scenario, this allows a person to prove that their personal details fulfil certain requirements without revealing the actual details.
For example, one could prove that she is over 21, without showing her exact date of birth.
Zero-Knowledge Proofs are famously illustrated by the “Yao’s Millionaires’ problem”. A scenario formulated by the computer scientist Andrew Yao. Yao discusses two millionaires, Alice and Bob, who do not want to reveal how much money each has but want to know who is the richest.
Blockchain as an Identity Management Solution
A distributed ledger (a “blockchain”) enables everyone in the network to have the same source of truth about which credentials are valid and who attested to the validity of the data inside the credential, without revealing the actual data.
The 3 actors in Identity Management: Owners, issuers and verifiers
When talking about leveraging blockchain technology for identity management, it’s important to note that there are three different actors in play: identity owners, issuers and verifiers.
The issuer, a trusted party such as local government, can issue personal credentials for an identity owner (the user). By issuing a credential, the issuer attests to the validity of the personal data in that credential (e.g. last name and date of birth). The identity owner can store those credentials in their personal identity wallet and use them later to prove statements about his or her identity to a third party (the verifier).
A Credential is a set of multiple identity attributes and an identity attribute is a piece of information about an identity (a name, an age, a date of birth).
Credentials are issued by second parties whom attest to the validity of the data inside the credential. The usefulness and reliability of a credential fully depends on the reputation/trustworthiness of the issuer.
Privacy and security in Identity Management
Through the infrastructure of a blockchain (like Sovrin), the verifying parties do not need to check the validity of the actual data in the provided proof but can rather use the blockchain to check the validity of the attestation and attesting party (such as the government) from which they can determine whether to validate the proof.
For example, when an identity owner presents a proof of their date-of-birth, rather than actually checking the truth of the date of birth itself, the verifying party will validate the government’s signature who issued and attested to this credential to then decide whether he trusts the government’s assessment about the accuracy of the data.
Hence, the validation of a proof is based on the verifier’s judgement of the reliability of the attestor.
Leveraging blockchain technology, like Tykn‘s digital identity management system does, establishes trust between the parties and guarantees the authenticity of the data and attestations, without actually storing any personal data on the blockchain.
This is crucial as a distributed ledger is immutable, meaning anything that is put on the ledger can never be altered nor deleted, and thus no personal data should ever be put on the ledger.
Identity Management Red Flag: Does personal data go on a blockchain?
Putting personal data on the ledger puts the privacy of the users in danger (as it will constantly be subject to hacking and data breaches). It could always be hacked (if not now, probably at some point in the future)
It violates current privacy regulation (e.g. GDPR; right to be forgotten);
it is also not efficient as an identity is dynamic (attributes can change over time e.g. house address or number of children).
No personal data should ever be put on a blockchain.
So… what exactly goes on the blockchain?
Only references and the associated attestation of a user’s verified credential are put on the ledger.
Privacy can be ensured through non-correlation principles via pseudonymisation. So, instead of storing actual private information, the only things stored on the ledger (for the purpose of verification) are:
Public Decentralised Identifiers (Public DIDs) and associated DID Descriptor Objects (DDOs) with verification keys and endpoints.
DIDs are a new type of unique identifiers for verifying digital identities, and are entirely controlled by the identity owner. DIDs are independent of centralised registries, authorities or identity providers.
The formal description for the structure of a credential.
The different (often tangible) proofs of identity or qualification issued by authorities; such as drivers licenses, passports, identification cards, credit cards, etc. Hence, credential definitions are — as the name suggests — merely the definitions of these different credentials to be stored on the ledger.
An option for issuers to be able to revoke the claim. The revocation registry is what tells the rest of the world how the issuer will publish the revocation information.
Proofs of consent for data sharing.
In order to prove consent or reception of data (basically saying the data has been received and checks have been executed on it), these consent receipts (i.e. proofs of consent) let people do so.
The next big thing in Identity Management: Decentralized Identifiers.
DIDs are a new type of unique identifiers for verifying digital identities, and are entirely controlled by the identity owner. DIDs are independent of centralised registries, authorities or identity providers.
According to Phil Windley, Chairman at Sovrin, DIDs should have the following properties:
Decentralized identifiers should be non-reassignable. They should be permanent. Other identifiers, such as IP address or email address, can be reassigned to other entities by whomever is in control. This reduces privacy and security.
Decentralized identifiers should be resolvable. Each DID resolves to a DID Document that states the “public keys, authentication protocols, and service endpoints necessary to initiate trustworthy interactions with the identified entity” (source). Through the DID Document, an entity should understand how to use that DID.
Decentralized identifiers should be cryptographically verifiable. Through the use of cryptographic keys, a DID owner can prove their ownership of the DID. The public key contained in the DID Document can also be used to attest to the authenticity of the issuing authority’s signature associated with a credential.
Decentralized identifiers should be decentralized. Current identitymanagement systems rely on centralized registries. Each of these registries ensures trust. DIDs do not depend on a central authority. Distributed ledger technology ensures trust as it allows everyone to have the same source of truth about the data in the credentials.
A new spec is coming up in W3C where you don’t need to always rely on the central service to resolve DIDs. For use cases where a DID is going to be unique. E.g in pairwise connections or closed groups you can use Peer DIDs. More info on this, here.
Decentralized Identifiers could then increase security, as they eliminate siloed identity management, and increase privacy, as they give the identity owner the opportunity to selectively disclose specific information about himself. Ultimately, they will lead to Self-Sovereign Identities as they allow each individual to own and control their identity without depending on other parties.
What if I need to change something? Revocation in Identity Management using Blockchain
Next to checking the attesting party, verification of a credential also includes checking the validity of the attestation itself. The validity of the attestation, meaning the accuracy and can be validated through a so called revocation registry.
The registry contains the status of each credential, whether it has been revoked (deleted or updated) and hence whether this specific credential is still valid.
In other words, the ledger enables everyone in the network to have the same source of truth about which credentials are still valid and who attested to the validity of the data inside the credential, without revealing the actual data.
>“This is my drivers licence”
>> “Says who?”
>> “Who are they and do I know I can trust them?”
>> “Do they still agree/attest to this or have they changed their judgement?”
>“Yes they have not revoked their attestation up to now”
Revocation means deleting or updating a credential. The possibility for an issuer to revoke a credential is crucial to an identity infrastructure for the main reason that identities are dynamic.
Attributes can change over time e.g. house address or number of children, and some credentials should have a expiry date for example a passport or drivers licence. The fact is, however, that in order to ensure trustworthiness of the system and eliminate the possibility to defraud, credentials are immutable.
After issuing, no one (not even the issuer) can change the information inside the credential. Hence, when attributes change, a new credential needs to be issued and the old one needs to be announced invalid. Thus, at each proof the users needs to proof that the credentials used in the proof are still valid. The revocation registry allows him to prove this without contacting the issuing party.
For example, the Government issues a credential to you, that you have 3 children. A month later your family is blessed with a 4th child. Now, the Government will mark the previous credential as invalid (stating that you have 3 children) and will issue a new credential stating that you have 4 children.
Through this technology, each user stores their digital identity credentials on a digital identity wallet on his devices (like his mobile phone). Which begs the question: what if his phone is lost or stolen?
The first one is to revoke the device’s authorization to use credentials. Digital Identity credentials are only valid if used from a device that was authorized to do so. If a user’s phone is lost or stolen, that user could use another authorized device, like his laptop, to write on the blockchain that his mobile phone’s authorization is now revoked.
This would take immediate effect and stop anyone from using the identity credentials on the phone. The thief would not be able to impersonate the user even if he has her passwords, biometrics or phone because the blockchain, immutable and secure, would contain a revocation registry for the phone.
Revocation of the device’s authorization impedes the thief to impersonate the user to create new relationships. The second step impedes the thief to explore the existing relationships between the device and other people or organisations. The second step thus is to revoke the existing relationship keys (pairwise connections where each of them has a unique key). Again, it will be written on the blockchain that these keys are deauthorized.
These two steps stop an identity thief to use identity credentials to access new services or explore relationships with existing ones. While conveniently letting the user still use his credentials on another device.
In many current cases, if users wished to cancel a stolen ID card, they would have to physically go to the municipality or governmental department, cancel that card and make a new one from scratch. Which would take time and still would not impede an identity thief from using your data. In the case of a stolen credit card, users will call the bank (which still takes considerable time) and won’t be able to use the card until a new one is issued and sent to him.
Sovrin have published a pdf with a thorough explanation on the technical aspects of device loss of theft that we recommend.
Models of Digital Identity Management
The first model of digital identity was a siloed one. Each organisation issues a digital credential to a user to allow him to access its services. Each user needs a new credential for every new organisation he engages with. According to Elizabeth M. Renieris (Former Global Policy Counsel at Evernym) this provides a “poor overall user experience”. Just remember all the websites you had to register and create new passwords and login details for.
The second model of digital identity is called the “Federated” one. Because of the poor user experience of the first model, third parties began issuing digital credentials that allow users to login to services and other websites. The best examples of this are “Login with facebook” and “Login with Google” functionalities. Companies “outsourced” their identity management to major corporations who have an economic interest in ammassing such large databases of personal data. This, of course, raises privacy and security concerns.
Facebook, Google and others became the middlemen of trust.
The emergence of Blockchain technology is what allowed the third model: Self-Sovereign Identity.
Self-Sovereign Identity Management
Through the use of the Sovrin blockchain, the technology of Self-Sovereign Identities may become a reality. A Self-Sovereign Identity is an identity you own. It’s yours. Only you hold it, on your own personal digital identity wallet, and only you decide who gets to “see” it and what of it they get to “see”.
This avoids the honeypot problem. There are no centralised storage of identity that may be subject to breaches. Meaning that for hackers to steal 50 million identity records they would have to hack those 50 million people individually. Considerably more difficult.
Characteristics of Self-Sovereign Identity:
– User-centric. Each user owns his own data and does not rely on a central entity to prove claims about himself
– Consent and Control. Each user has full control and consent on what personal information he his sharing and with whom.
– Interoperability. Self-Sovereign Identity uses a common identity metasystem. This allows users to verify their identity across multiple platforms and locations (that use the same metasystem).
A Self-Sovereign Identity is thus portable, private and secure.
The Benefits of Self-Sovereign Identities
A digital identity management system where organisations store the minimum necessary personal data of their users means less personal data management and less bureaucracy. Reducing data management costs and increasing the efficiency of identification processes. All while putting people’s privacy and security first.
According to Darrell O’Donnell, a digital identity expert, companies are realising the major liability that is storing personal data of customers (or employees). Every breach, loss or theft of personal data may turn into significant lawsuits and fines. Which may mean that, in the near future, companies will also start working their way into Self-Sovereign Identity solutions.
We wrote extensively here about how this innovative technology is benefiting several industries. Reducing governmental bureaucracy, shaping a more efficient healthcare system, detecting academic fraud, creating a better banking experience, helping to provide a more efficient humanitarian aid distribution system and helping companies avoid personal data breaches and GDPR fines.
Tykn is looking to hire a Senior Solidity Developer to accelerate the scaling of the company!
Do you have a proven track record in solidity smart-contracts development and are looking for a new challenge? Look no further!
– The (re)evaluation and (re)design of the system architecture, which is based on Solidity smart contracts.
– Ensure the validity of the system by testing the code.
– Ensure resiliency, privacy and upgradeability in the code that is built.
– Work within Agile and DevOps frameworks.
– Guide in the alignment with overall architecture design together with the rest of the technical team.
– Assist in bug-fixes and other problem-solving processes.
– Provide detailed technical information at e.g. conferences or meet-ups
– In-depth understanding of Blockchain technology
– 2+ years experience in developing Ethereum smart contracts written in Solidity.
– High level of experience of working in Agile projects with highly automated DevOps.
– Experience in system testing
– Experience in collaborating with User Interface developers.
– Experience in incident and problem resolution in production environments.
– Enthusiasm for working in a space full of unknowns, pivoting as needed, and being comfortable with not knowing the end state is a must.
– Teamwork, flexibility, initiative, communication and organisation competencies are required.
– Experience of full-stack development, especially with Angular and Node, is an advantage.
A friendly and modern workplace in the center of the city of Leiden, The Netherlands. The office building houses various amenities, including a gym, wellness area and swimming pool overlooking the city. We work with one of the largest NGOs in the world, creating the impact needed in the identity space for social and economic inclusion. You will be working with dynamic professionals and ego-free team players who value taking initiative and spearheading development processes. You can count on a competitive salary, creative freedom, and plenty of ways to increase your skills in an inspiring international environment. We also always have international events and trips planned throughout Europe, the U.S. and MENA region, where the team is usually present. We are impacting the lives of billions of people, hence changing the meaning of being a “billionaire”!
So are you the next Solidity Dev. Billionaire? Please apply by emailing your resume with cover letter to: email@example.com
Note: this position requires you to be on location Monday to Friday at least for part of the day to make sure everything is handled. This is not a remote role.
The International Disaster Database records a steady increase in the frequency of natural disasters over the past 35 years. In the past 10 years, the number of people affected by humanitarian crises have almost doubled, whilst the cost of humanitarian assistance has tripled. For this reason, the humanitarian world is undergoing a transformation in the way that aid is delivered. This transformation must not compromise the humanitarian principles of impartiality, neutrality and independence.
Assistance must always reach the most vulnerable. An effective way to support people affected by natural disasters is through a combination of CBA and FBF. FBF allows for both decision-makers and people affected to better prepare for and cope with natural disasters and thus reducing needs when disaster strikes. CBA offers a more efficient and dignified means to deliver assistance, empowers people in need and fosters local economies.
However, these CBA programs face multiple challenges. Every disaster type and local context has its unique set of challenges and in turn a unique set of solutions. The scope of the current solutions differ dramatically from high digital connectivity, to that of low or no connectivity. For this reason we started with a common set of parameters that we want to improve on. These can be clustered as:
TIME: Depending on the location, getting cash-based assistance to the most vulnerable can be a slow process. We aim for a system to trigger fund release from anything up to 6 days to 24 hours before a natural disaster strikes (for early warning and early action).
SAFETY: Both Red Cross field staff & volunteers, and the recipients of assistance, are vulnerable due to large amounts of physical cash.
COSTS: International bank transfers, hiring security and in-country logistical challenges creates high costs.
INCLUSIVENESS: Beneficiaries do not always have a proof of identity and are therefore not easily included in humanitarian aid across various humanitarian organizations.
SCALABILITY: Current solutions differ dramatically in each context.
510 together with Tykn.tech are exploring the potential of humanitarian aid integrating blockchain in current humanitarian operations.
We gathered both teams to meet with a diverse group, including experienced Red Cross cash delegates, system engineers, econometricians and social scientists. Through numerous sessions, we established the current and potential user journeys for all stakeholders. Highlighting challenges of beneficiary registration due to a lack of proof of identity. Incorporating the knowledge of a 150 years of providing humanitarian aid, we look at the social & economic factors that affect the potential technological applications and algorithms that can help identify and ultimately reach the most vulnerable.
The project will conduct a pilot integration in at least one of the current Red Cross operations during 2018.
The ultimate goal is to develop a system that can adapt to any type of disaster in any location. In the interest of scalability, we are exploring two very different local contexts. One with high digital connectivity as with St Maarten, and one with low to no connectivity such as the most vulnerable areas of Malawi.
510 is exploring the use of Blockchain in Humanitarian Aid with Tykn.tech.
The organization is looking for smarter and more efficient solutions to enhance aid when a natural disaster strikes.
510 and Tykn.tech are researching the potential of blockchain to improve cash based assistance. The organization aims to develop a system with a digital wallet that can be used to transfer money faster to those affected in a disaster area. With this money, those affected can purchase necessities like food, water and other relief goods. Today, the 510 data team of the Netherlands Red Cross and Tykn.tech are announcing their cooperation at The North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami.
In some specific cases, the Red Cross chooses to give money to those affected by a disaster to buy the things they need, like food. This process fosters the local economy, increases the resilience of the affected communities and reduces the need of food parcel distributions.
Safe and Efficient
510 and Tykn.tech are researching how blockchain technology can make cash distributions both safer and more efficient. The use of blockchain can, among other things, reduce the logistical challenges where cash distributions are involved. This makes the situation safer for both Red Cross field staff and those affected by the disaster. In parallel, the use of blockchain has the potential to lower overhead costs and accelerate the aid process. As each digital wallet could be linked to an individual, it would be easier to see who has or has not received aid.
“We know from experience that in some specific cases, giving money instead of relief goods works better. Blockchain could optimize this process. To insure we explore to the fullest, we have chosen to work with Tykn.tech”, says Stefania Giodini, team leader of the 510 data team.
“Because of my experience as a refugee, I know the importance of the responsible use of data in humanitarian aid. Working with 510 ensures we can create a process that meets the needs of those affected.”, says Tey el-Rjula, founder of Tykn.tech.
How and if humanitarian aid can integrate blockchain and what the practical implications will be is currently being researched.
St-Maarten has been heavily affected by hurricane Irma and therefore there are currently many Red Cross projects, both running and planned, that focus on recovery. 510 is building on the learnings of St-Maarten’s unique set of challenges and is investigating the potential of blockchain to positively impact these projects. The ultimate goal is to develop a system that can adapt to any type of disaster in any local context.