---
# System prepended metadata

title: SSI Orbit Podcast Notes 2024-01-23

---

# 1 - Introduction and Context
_**Christopher’s Legacy and Expertise:** Begin with Christopher introducing himself. Highlight his foundational contributions, such as co-authoring the TLS spec and popularizing the concept of Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI)._

I’m Christopher Allen, a technologist and trust architect with a career dedicated to enhancing privacy, security, and autonomy in the digital realm. In journey began with RSA, Apple, PGP, Digicash, Netscape, which led to me co-authoring the IETF’s TLS 1.0 standard, a cornerstone of internet communications for security-in-transit.

> "TLS has been fundamental in establishing encrypted channels for internet transactions, ensuring data integrity and confidentiality."

In 2016, I introduced the concept of Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) through my article, [The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity](https://www.lifewithalacrity.com/article/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity/), where I outline [ten foundational principles](https://www.lifewithalacrity.com/article/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity/#ten-principles-of-self-sovereign-identity) aimed at granting individuals control over their digital identities. I emphasized that SSI
> "allows individuals to control their digital identities without reliance on centralized authorities."

# 2 - Values and Principles

_**Values-Driven Design:** Explore how Christopher’s principles, like dignity, autonomy, and privacy, inform his approach to designing decentralized systems. Reference his emphasis on aligning technology with human rights, particularly the Universal Declaration of Human Rights._

In my series "Musings of a Trust Architect", I wrote in [How My Values Inform Design](https://www.blockchaincommons.com/musings/ValuesDesign/), 
>"We’re not just creating technical specifications. We’re crafting spaces where people will live significant portions of their lives."

This perspective underscores my commitment to embedding human values in digital system design. Principles like dignity, autonomy, and privacy must inform every decision. For instance,
>"A dignified system doesn’t simply protect; it fosters agency and participation, allowing individuals to thrive without fear of surveillance, discrimination, or exploitation."

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides a vital lens for designing these systems. As I emphasized,
>"Technical systems should support autonomy and human flourishing, aligned with principles of equity, fairness, and dignity."

To achieve this, digital architectures must minimize data collection, prioritize user consent, and protect individuals against coercion.

> Data Minimization: "Limiting the amount of shared data to the minimum necessary to protect privacy and reduce the risk of data loss or harm." 

> User Consent: "Providing clear, revocable consent mechanisms that align with user empowerment." 

> Protection Against Coercion: "Designing systems that allow individuals to defend against coercion and violations of their privacy, autonomy, agency, and control." 

To try to explore the lens of my values, I wrote [10 Principles of Dignity, Autonomy, and Trust](https://www.blockchaincommons.com/musings/ValuesDesign/#appendix-1-principles-of-dignity-autonomy-and-trust-in-digital-systems)

_**The Role of Ostrom’s Principles:** Discuss how Elinor Ostrom's principles for managing commons influenced Christopher's perspective on SSI and governance._

[A Revised “Ostrom’s Design Principles for Collective Governance of the Commons](https://www.lifewithalacrity.com/article/a-revised-ostroms-design-principles-for-collective-governance-of-the-commons/)

Elinor Ostrom’s Nobel Prize winning work on governing the commons is one of my important influences my thinking about decentralized systems. In my Principles of Dignity, Autonomy, and Trust, I noted, 

>"Resilient systems must operate seamlessly across jurisdictions and political boundaries."

Ostrom’s principles, in particular polycentric governance and collective decision-making, resonate with the decentralized ethos of SSI. They inspire my belief that digital ecosystems must balance individual sovereignty with shared governance structures, fostering collaboration without centralization.

# 3 - Governance and Sovereignty
_**Balancing Market, State, and Rights:** Dive into the interplay between market-driven (US), state-driven (China), and rights-driven (EU) approaches to governance. Discuss how Christopher’s ideas on agency and sovereignty align or contrast with these models._

Governance models in the digital realm reflect broader societal dynamics. My work seeks to chart a path centered on individual agency and sovereignty, avoiding the pitfalls of centralization that all the current market-driven (US), state-driven (China), and rights-driven (EU) initiatives encourage. As I’ve written,
>"Sovereignty is about empowering individuals as peers, not petitioners."

This vision aligns with decentralized systems that prioritize autonomy and trust while ensuring fairness and inclusivity.

_**Sovereignty as Agency, Not Control:** Highlight feminist perspectives Christopher references, where sovereignty is framed as individual agency rather than domination. Discuss how this applies to SSI and digital trust._

In my series "Musings of a Trust Architect", I highlight that the origins of the SSI include inspirations from the writings of feminist leaders about sovereignty. Vaishnavi Pallapothu wrote:
> "Sovereignty would move beyond the implication of sovereignty as domination, towards sovereignty as the right to individual agency and prosperity."

Selma Hayek in a famous speech said:
> "You can be a thousand different women. It's your choice which one you want to be. It's about freedom and sovereignty. You celebrate who you are. You say, 'This is my kingdom.'"

The feminist perspectives on sovereignty, which emphasize agency over domination, are central to this approach. For example,

>"The principle of ‘Consent’ in SSI means creating systems where users can interact selectively and intentionally, free from coercion."

These values are critical for designing systems that respect individual agency while fostering trust.

I also feel that Agency Law is superior to Property and Contract Law in regards to digital identity, see article: [Principal Authority: A New Perspective on Self-Sovereign Identity](https://www.blockchaincommons.com/articles/Principal-Authority/)

# 4 - Challenges in Digital Identity

_**Has SSI Lost Its Way?:** Reflect on Christopher’s question, "Has Our SSI Ecosystem Become Morally Bankrupt?" Explore whether modern implementations like mDLs and did:web compromise SSI principles for convenience._

In my article and talks on [Has Our SSI Ecosystem Become Morally Bankrupt?](https://www.blockchaincommons.com/musings/musings-ssi-bankruptcy/), I raised concerns about the direction of modern SSI implementations. Tools like mDLs and did:web often prioritize convenience over core principles like autonomy and resilience. I argued,
>"We must ensure that technical designs are guided by deeply rooted human values and ethical principles."

I caution that
>"This is the real reason the SSI ecosystem may be faltering: not due to market forces, but because we have failed to unequivocally commit to upholding the core values of decentralization and privacy and to resisting compromises that undermine human dignity. By doing so, we have become indistinguishable from the very systems we set out to disrupt.

_**The Internet as a Rivalrous Commons:**
Discuss Christopher’s critique of the internet's transformation from an open commons to rivalrous fiefdoms. Explore how physical secrets, such as private keys, anchor digital sovereignty._

(unpublished post at https://hackmd.io/PXCeFhAfRP-hHVlKHoAu_Q)

I’ve long critiqued the internet’s evolution from an open commons into rivalrous fiefdoms controlled by centralized entities. As I noted,
>"Private keys, as physical secrets, anchor digital sovereignty."

They serve as "digital circuit breakers," offering protection against systemic vulnerabilities and coercion. By anchoring digital systems in these principles, we can resist the encroachment of centralized control and preserve individual agency.

#5 - Practical Implications and Innovations

_**Freedom to Transact:** Dive into Christopher’s argument for an international right to transact as a foundational human right. Discuss how this principle underpins economic participation and autonomy._

(see unpublished draft at https://hackmd.io/pVqFX9t0QeSTx2_CxaE7xw)

Economic participation I believe is a foundational human right. Without out, the established rights of freedom of speech and assembly are not possible. Decentralized systems must protect this right, ensuring individuals can engage in commerce and other economic activities free from undue restrictions or surveillance.

_**Physical Secrets as Digital Circuit Breakers:** Highlight the importance of anchoring digital rights in physical secrets, such as air-gapped keys and biometric systems, to preserve sovereignty._

Physical secrets, such as air-gapped keys and decentralized key management systems, are critical to preserving sovereignty. As I explained in Musings of a Trust Architect, "These tools ensure autonomy even in adversarial environments, protecting individuals from coercion and exploitation." By integrating these safeguards into digital systems, we can create architectures that are resilient and aligned with human values.

# 5 - Vision and Future Directions

_**Digital Identity as Public Infrastructure:** Explore the tension between the need for large-scale investment in digital identity infrastructure and the risks of centralization. Compare this to the ARPANET model of foundational government funding._

Building large-scale digital identity infrastructure requires balancing investment with decentralization. In Musings of a Trust Architect, I pointed out, "Public infrastructure can draw lessons from ARPANET, which combined foundational government funding with open standards." This approach ensures inclusivity and resilience while avoiding the risks of centralized control.

However, I don't believe this is enough. We must have a culture of support. I talk about this more in [Open Development: The Necessary Next Step for Open Source](https://www.blockchaincommons.com/articles/Open-Development/)

In this I like ideas like the [Open Source Pledge](https://opensourcepledge.com) where organizations agree sponsor open source maintainers a minimum of US$2,000 per year per developer at their company, and to self-report annually a blog post outlining your payments to maintainers.

_**Evolving Principles:** Discuss Christopher’s view that the original SSI principles should evolve in response to new challenges while staying rooted in their foundational values._

The original SSI principles remain a strong foundation, but they must adapt to evolving challenges. In Principles of Dignity, Autonomy, and Trust, I argued, "Implementing systems that respect dignity and autonomy demands a new kind of techno-social contract." Principles like Progressive Trust and Privacy by Design must remain central, ensuring that digital systems evolve in alignment with human rights and values.
