Text archives Help


Re: [projectvrm] ID2020 and refugee identity during escape


Chronological Thread 
  • From: LaVonne Reimer < >
  • To: Joe Andrieu < >
  • Cc: ProjectVRM list < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] ID2020 and refugee identity during escape
  • Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:09:28 -0400

Once again Joe makes it clear!

I seriously like the models but will not be at IIW. It conflicts with the best time to go to the UK. However I eagerly await your white papers.

Thanks!

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Joe Andrieu < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Hi all,

Long time lurker here. I've recently come across the ID2020 project being
promoted in various places (id2020.org). I'm guessing people here are
probably
involved or at least are observing it closely from outside.

I'm interested in what dangers there might be for refugees who have yet
to make
it to some place of relative safety. I can certainly see the value of
self-sovereign identity for refugees *after* they have fled whatever
conflict
situation they've come from (starting a bank account, accessing services,
etc.), but it seems to me that inauthentic documentation has historically
played a very important role in protecting people. Being able to
plausibly deny
having access to your documentation and being able to present downright
false
documents was essential for many who escaped the holocaust, or the
Rwandan
genocide, to mention just two examples. Is there a danger that projects
like
ID2020 remove this by making identity too easy, ubiquitous and secure?

Yes, but the risk arises predominantly from thinking (and implementing) identity solely in terms of reducing ambiguity about the physical body. That is, when identity means making sure you are a specific physical person, then all forms of identity risk those who are fleeing persecution of their person.

At the recent Rebooting Web of Trust, I led as session where we identified four different mental models used for identity: Security, Liberty, Data, and Complexity.  I'll be revisiting this conversation at IIW and will eventually publish one or more papers or articles about it.

The short version is that each of these models are completely valid, and depending on your use case, one or more may be more important to you.

For example, the Security mental model is fixated on reducing the question of identity to a physical body. The Liberty mental model, in contrast, holds that how we represent our identity is a fundamental freedom and that participation in society rarely needs reduction to the physicality.

The roots of self-sovereign identity are in the meeting of the Liberty and Data mental models: let's enable the inevitable data-centric model in disparate technical systems by empowering individuals to control the root identifiers and attributes used when interacting with these systems.

To answer your question, there *are* risks from any identity system, but there are also ways to construct identiy independent of physical uniqueness. These alternatives can enable refugees--or any underserved, unbanked, or under-credentialed population--to have access to justice, health care, social services, etc., without unnecessary exposure of their person (as an embodiment in a particular body).

-j





--
LaVonne Reimer, Founder
Lumenous
503-720-0690 (cell)
lavonnereimer (skype)

www.lumenous.net




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.