Live data from Hacker News

Auth0 Verifiable Credentials

verifiablecredentials.dev

131–134 of 134 posts

Re: Auth0 Verifiable Credentials

#131
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels like reinventing the past, looking at what people have done with just x509/PKI in multiple European countries. Though that's not to say there aren't a few fun ideas in there, it just seems much less mature with many mistakes repeated.

Federation and acceptance are key. My country of citizenship has been issuing PIV(?)-based smartcards for more than a decade now, yet almost nobody could (and still can) verify them within the country, let alone abroad. On the other hand, the EU digital Covid certificate project managed to get pretty widespread adoption in a short timeframe – with a vastly simpler technology stack backing it. I'm really hoping the eI…

> My country of citizenship has been issuing PIV(?)-based smartcards for more than a decade now, yet almost nobody could (and still can) verify them within the country

That is most likely specific to your country and it's approach to deployment, your politics. Estonia mandated the availability of smartcard/PIV/mTLS authentication and it's now very widespread. Also really easy and free to implement.

> let alone abroad.

That is unwillingness to follow the EU standard from some EU countries and wish to reinvent the wheel (e.g. BankID and similar). I know that eIDAS-compliant PIV/smartcard implementations are cross-compliant e.g. Finland-Estonia-Latvia-Lithuania. But code-stealing Polish implementation for example isn't.

> On the other hand, the EU digital Covid certificate project managed to get pretty widespread adoption in a short timeframe – with a vastly simpler technology stack backing it.

Each country were given most of the stack required, they bypassed a lot of bullshit many countries have with software development.

> I'm really hoping the eIDAS project or a similar private initiative manages to use that momentum and bring (hopefully private) ID verification to the web.

When PSD2 required 2FA for banking, we had had it for more than five years at that point. So there is hope some EU legislation smooths these things out at some point, but it's going to be quite late.

Re: Auth0 Verifiable Credentials

#132
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the system just isn't designed like that, the whole point of VCs is that the system becomes decentralized. To check a credential is valid you absolutely don't need to hit the Government, you need to trust its public key, which you can easily get once (or keep updating using things like DID)... you are arguing about a different system design that just doesn't exist and has no reason to exist.

> the whole point of VCs is that the system becomes decentralized. You say decentralized, yet that Verifiable Data Registry seems like a central component to checking whether you are you. How is that not able to see that you checked your ID?

That's not a centralized registry. In fact, it's usually a distributed ledger, normally a blockchain but any distributed database of public keys and IDs will do.

Also, the ID in the VC is not something that can easily be used to identify you. It may be in basic implementations, but it shouldn't. The W3C spec recommends using DID[1]... A DID is a random ID, basically, which is stored in the "distributed ledger" where others can find your current keys and other metadata (none of which containing personal data)... you can have as many DIDs as you want, e.g. one for each usage you make of your VCs, making it impossible to track you around... you should look at the W3C spec if you really want to understand how DIDs and VCs are supposed to work, the Auth0 website is a much lighter , pre-digested and somewhat more centralized version of things that make it much easier to get started (Which is a great thing, but hopefully you shouldn't judge VCs from only what they're pushing).

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#dfn-decentralized-ident...

Re: Auth0 Verifiable Credentials

#134

Like anything OAuth2-related, it's frustratingly vague and jargony. Verifiable credentials is a terrible name. We have had verifiable cryptographic credentials for more than 40 years. What I want, is a practical protocol to prove to a third party 1. That I am a real person (e.g, has a unique credential issued by my government) 2. That I'm the only one currently "logged in" with them, with that credential. 3. Without…

What makes you believe that the fewest parties mathematically possible is meaningfully small?

For example, if the lower bound is hundreds then it's mostly superfluous since that information will eventually leak one way or another.

Post reply on HN