---
robots: noindex, nofollow
title: Musing - Misc. SSI Thoughts
tags: musings
---

# Misc. SSI Thoughts

(totally pre-draft, just a collection old notes, chatGPT prompts & questions, etc.)

# Some other parts of origins story

In 1988, I met Phil Salin at West Coast Computer Faire, after weird Q&A session with Ted Nelson, who coined the term Hypertext and fdounded the Xanadu Project, fund. Both Xanadu and his company Amix, were funded by John Walker, who founded Autodesk.

Xanadu was really a very early World Wide Web, that inspired Apple’s Hypercard, which in turn is credited by Tim Berners-Lee as inspired the World Wide Web we have today.

Amix has the first smart contract system (long before the word was coined by Nick Szabo in 1995 https://firstmonday.org/article/view/548/469 )

Phil introduced me to the book “The Ecology of Computation”, published in 1988 https://www.amazon.com/Ecology-Computation-Computer-Artificial-Intelligence/dp/0444703756 which among other things discussion much of what we know as computational agents and the DeFi smart contract technologies.

Phil Salin also wrote “The Wealth of Kitchens: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of 
the Wealth of Kitchens” http://www.philsalin.com/kitchens/index.html which explored a the beginning of understanding the “deep wealth” of complex systems (in this case a kitchen), and how economic decisions should be made.

(Don’t know how to fit this in:
Back 2000 I participated in collaborative event that created a white paper (2003) called “Augmented Social Network” (ASN) https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1068/988
* Persistent online identity;
* interoperability between communities;
* brokered relationships; and, public interest matching technologies

These ultimately led to “user-centric” architectures for the internet.
)

These later led me to discussions leveraging patterns and concepts from biology into other domains, sometimes called bio-mimicry. One interesting area were the patterns for biological membranes, which allow life as we know it to exist. They enable separation between the inside and outside of an organism, controlling by means of their selective permeability which substances enter and leave. The exist at multiple levels, cellular, organ, the individual, the family, the species. It turns out this biological pattern has useful at a variety of levels.

Later, when I taught technology leadership at a Green MBA, I become aware of discussion about rights of nature, so called biological sovereignty rights. In 2008, Ecuador officially recognized the right of Mother Earth to “maintain and generate its cycles, structure, functions and evolutionary purposes” in a constitutional document.

In 2009 Elenor Ostrom won the Nobel prize for her 8 design principles for collective governance of the commons. The first principle, which I’ll paraphrase:

1a DEFINE AUTHORIZED USE: The community of those who have the right to use the common resource is clearly defined.
1b DEFINE COMMONS BOUNDARIES: The boundaries of the commons are clearly defined so as to separate the usage rules from the larger environment.

These are all forms of membranes. Together they hold together complex systems that allow for deep wealth.

I also felt in these late-Obama / rise of Trump years in that the world was in one of its periodic upheavals to renegotiate the nature of sovereignty. In the past it rose from chieftains to lords, from lords to kings, from kings to cities & countries, onward to global powers and to corporations, and in current politics ordinary people were being left out of the discussion:

* “As digital systems create representations of us, a free society demands that we be given a voice in deciding how those representations are created and used. Not because we own that data, but because individual human beings are the ONLY valid source for that moral authority. “ — Christopher Allen 2018 (https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/989120215702261761.html)

After a break from the cryptography & digital world, when I returned to IIW in the 2014, I found that that the early 2000 “Augment Social Network” and “user-centric” identity approaches failed as they were co-opted by those with centralized power. We needed better answers.

Also in 2014 I rediscovered Bitcoin, and found that it solved some problems that never had been solved before in the area of decentralization, so I decided to try to apply these to digital identity, which let me founding the “Rebooting Web of Trust” collaborative workshops in 2015.

When we started to discover some possible answers, they led me to desiring a strong term to parallel the biological for membranes, the boundaries of control, etc. as we as people negotiate these with those holding power.

Thus I chose “self-sovereign”. In our physical world the state can’t violate a natural person’s physical and mental integrity, and general violate or coerce the dignity of a human being, except when that person risks the physical, mental integrity of others. These are fundamental human rights. These are a good membranes, a good boundary. We need this in our digital world.

Authorities often ignoring the voice of ordinary people in these negotiations, yet the relative risks to individuals are greater.
Thus Self-Sovereignty gives individuals a voice as we renegotiate what it means to be human in the digital world.

This not perfect control. It's not
complete. But there is an edge, a boundary of integrity that is our own.

Self-Sovereignty doesn’t mean that you are in complete control. But it does define the borders within which you can make decisions and outside of which you negotiate with others as peers, not as a petitioner.

—

In years since, I’ve particularly come to appreciate use of the term sovereignty in the women’s movement:

https://www.bethanywebster.com/blog/what-is-sovereignty-13-elements/

> What Is Sovereignty?
>
> To be sovereign is to claim your own inner authority as valid, to live rooted from the truth inside you, which is not beholden to any external person, institution or belief system. It is to belong to yourself; it is to feel strong, to be true, and to embody your integrity. To be sovereign is to no longer be imprisoned by the damaging cultural and familial messages that tell women to defer to others, to be silent and small out of fear of rejection, disapproval or shame.
>
> Why Be Sovereign?
>
> Anytime a woman speaks her truth to power, the critics quickly begin their chorus of judgements
>
> Sovereignty: Sourced From Within
>
> Sovereignty is a power sourced from within, from a woman’s connection within herself. It’s a power sourced from your own connection with your body, your connection with the earth, with nature, with your heart and with all life. It’s NOT a false, patriarchal power, which is based in power-over someone or something else. It’s not competitive, dominant, submissive or hierarchical in any way.  That’s why a woman’s sovereignty individually and even more so collectively, is a HUGE threat to patriarchy and why women’s bodies and psyches have been demonized, pathologized and suppressed—because we don’t actually need a mediating force outside of us in order to access it and embody it.
>
> 1. Self-definition: You are your ultimate authority of truth and what’s right for you.
> 2. Setting Boundaries early and often without guilt: Nurturing the Self is a priority.
> 3. Being skilled at enduring the Discomfort that comes with Growth.
> 4. Knowing that you are sacred, life is sacred, your body and nature is sacred. 
> 5. Practicing Inner Mothering: An indestructible “Bubble of Belonging” to oneself.
> 6. Honoring your body and its limited window of tolerance. 
> 7. Owning your right to remain centered in your own being, no matter what’s happening. 
> 8. Resilient in the face of change: Inner safety allows you to allow chips fall where they may.
> 9. Knowing your worth cannot be earned. It is inherent, established, not up for debate. 
>
> How to build sovereignty
> 1. Re-building a sensitivity to the inner signals indicating when you are approaching a limit of some kind. 
> 2. Developing your voice and refine how you speak up and set boundaries: 
> 3. Building Resilience in not taking people’s responses to your boundaries personally: 
>
> 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.'
Salma Hayek

—-

Deep wealth

Transitioning to the New Economy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na_YQyKHpAQ

- [New Economy, New Wealth by Arthur Brock](https://prezi.com/xmzld_-wayho/new-economy-new-wealth/) We are entering a post-industrial age with a very different economy and needs for a different view of wealth. What does this mean for us?

Deep Wealth; Arthur Brock; metacurrency
- [Deep Wealth and MetaCurrency - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92xdGwdc4gs)
* Art Brock and Eric Harris-Braun - Deep Wealth https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN9ykoFT-1Q
- [Copy of New Economy, New Wealth by Arthur Brock on Prezi Next](https://prezi.com/beiiz5stbvct/copy-of-new-economy-new-wealth/?token=5186a1a9a498b81aa44edd54889bed8d7c219b888969f13c3f02b56680dfcf1f)
- https://metacurrency.org/about/
-

- [Home | Grassroots Economics](https://www.grassrootseconomics.org/)
- [Community Inclusion Currencies](https://dashboard.sarafu.network/)
- [Metacurrency resources](https://www.artbrock.com/metacurrency/resources)
- [The MetaCurrency Myth. The story I want to be able to tell my… | by Arthur Brock | The World of Deep Wealth | Medium](https://medium.com/metacurrency-project/the-metacurrency-myth-8db61ed14fb8)
- [arthur brock | be you.](https://redefineschool.com/arthur-brock/)
- [Arthur Brock of Holochain - A Nature-Inspired Approach to Currency](http://cryptoradio.io/arthur-brock-holochain/)
- [Our Philosophy - The MetaCurrency Project](https://metacurrency.org/about/)

- [MetaCurrency Orientation by Alan Rosenblith](https://prezi.com/ijiokjbrolwo/metacurrency-orientation/)
- [Banks for a Better World by Arthur Brock](https://prezi.com/-4xbzvijfghp/banks-for-a-better-world/)

——

“Self-Sovereign Identity is both an ideology to reclaim human dignity and authority in the digital world and an emerging suite of technologies designed to enable that movement.”
– Christopher Allen

“As digital systems create representations of us, a free society demands that we be given a voice in deciding how those representations are created and used. Not because we own that data, but because individual human beings are the ONLY valid source for that moral authority.

Human dignity demands that individuals be treated with respect no matter which system they interact with, face-to-face or online. Without that, we become nothing but data in the machine—entries in a ledger to be managed, problems to be solved, digital serfs. We are not.”
– Christopher Allen

“Self-sovereignty applies in the real world — We all have inherent dignity independent of our birth place, lineage, or labels, simply because we are human.

In our physical world the state can’t violate a natural person’s physical and mental integrity, and general violate or coerce the dignity of a human being, except when that person risks the physical, mental integrity of others. We as natural persons have other rights such as freedom of speech, of assembly, and association with who we want — again, with the limits that it doesn’t harm others.

The 10 principles of Digital Self-Sovereign Identity attempt to bring that real-world self-sovereignty to the virtual world. But since there is no “locality” with your digital identity we have to be more careful about the control, coercion, and undue influence of others.”
– Christopher Allen

"Human dignity demands that individuals be treated with respect no matter which system they interact with, whether face-to-face or digitally online. Without that, we become nothing but data in the machine — entries in a ledger to be managed, problems to be solved, digital serfs. We are not."
— Christopher Allen, Co-Founder & Chairman Rebooting Web of Trust

“Granting control of digital identity to centralized authorities of the online world suffers from the same problems caused by the state authorities of the physical world: users are locked in to a single authority who can deny their identity or even confirm a false identity. Centralization innately gives power to the centralized entities, not to the users.”
– Christopher Allen

“If you are a blockchain advocate, remember that blockchain, combined with identity, is a two edged sword. The best is we can hold the powerful accountable for their actions. The worst is we weaponize identity against the powerless.”
— Christopher Allen (2018)

“Identity can be a double-edged sword — usable for both beneficial and maleficent purposes. Thus, an identity system must balance transparency, fairness, and support of the commons with protection for the individual.”
— Christopher Allen (2016)

Self-Sovereign Identity: A Progress Report (2018)

https://twitter.com/ChristopherA/status/989120215702261761 (2018-04-025)

On this day two years ago I chose the term “Self-Sovereign Identity” as the name for a new manifesto of 10 foundational principles for digital identity. It was a rallying cry to start a movement toward human-rights focused decentralized identity.

I was not the first to use the term. The earliest I know of was Devon Loffreto
@NZN writing in Project VRM and later in his blog about "sovereign source authority" where he said that individuals “have an established Right to an ‘identity’”. https://www.moxytongue.com/2012/02/what-is-sovereign-source-authority.html (2012-02-15)

My manifesto included some history of the evolution of digital identity, from centralized forms, into federated identity, then to user-centric identity, and why that wasn’t enough—why we need Self-Sovereign Identity: http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html (2016-04-25)

A more recent article by
@RuffTimo explores the tradeoffs of these different identity architectures: siloed/traditional and third-party provider vs self-sovereign identity’s peer-to-peer approach:
https://medium.com/evernym/the-three-models-of-digital-identity-relationships-ca0727cb5186 (2018-04-24)

Popular blockchain news page @Coindesk promptly republished and featured my manifesto on their own site, adding the concept, term & principles to the larger blockchain community agenda. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2016/04/27/the-path-to-self-sovereign-identity/ (2016-04-27)

Coindesk then asked me to speak at their conference Consensus, where I focused on the "Perils & Promise of Identity on the Blockchain" https://twitter.com/consensus2022/status/730487202082361345/ (slides) https://www.slideshare.net/ChristopherA/identity-of-the-blockchain-perils-and-promise

Self-Sovereign Identity is both an ideology to reclaim human dignity and authority in the digital world and an emerging suite of technologies designed to enable that movement.

Self-Sovereign Identity begins with the basic premise that you should control your own identity in interactions with organizations & other people. https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity/blob/master/self-sovereign-identity-principles.md

Self-Sovereignty doesn’t mean that you are in complete control. But it does define the borders within which you can make decisions and outside of which you negotiate with others as peers, not as a petitioner.

Today, digital identity is administered by centralized authorities such as governments, corporations & software platform providers. They have a vested interest in constraining people both on & offline because they desire to either control behavior or to make a profit from it.

Self-Sovereign Identity is rooted in principles from the Enlightenment, as well as the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

The first principle of Self-Sovereign identity is that as human beings we exist. Our personal existence is our most fundamental fact, and the control over our self is our most fundamental freedom, our “Unalienable Right". This should also be true in the digital world.

As digital systems create representations of us, a free society demands that we be given a voice in deciding how those representations are created and used. Not because we own that data, but because individual human beings are the ONLY valid source for that moral authority.

Human dignity demands that individuals be treated with respect no matter which system they interact with, face-to-face or online. Without that, we become nothing but data in the machine—entries in a ledger to be managed, problems to be solved, digital serfs. We are not.

A real test of this concept & manifesto was the first United Nations Summit on Digital Identity, #ID2020. Some feared that diplomats would disapprove of the concept. Yet in the first hours I heard two UN officials & ambassadors use the term. https://web.archive.org/web/20170502022758/http://id2020.org:80/news/2016/12/2/identity-20

Later I heard the concept resonated, as many UN staffers are frustrated with sovereign-nations, due to the 1.563 million stateless people with no citizenship at all, both clashing with the rights offered to all by the Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Blockchain-for-Development.pdf

In Europe, the emergence of new EU law around personal privacy, known as GDPR, has helped with adoption of the concept, as many feel the current centralized identity architectures will not be able to handle the new regulation: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/gdpr-reflection-self-sovereign-identity-blockchain-nicolas-ameye/

In the two years since the original 10 principles were published, a number of technologies supporting Self-Sovereign Identity have begun to be implemented, most notably a nascent standard for Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs): https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot5-boston/blob/master/draft-documents/did-primer.md

The DID specification was incubated at #RebootingWebOfTrust Design Workshops, where over 30 white papers, specs, and prototypes have been collaboratively created over the course of 6 events. http://WebOfTrust.info

The DID specification is now being nurtured into being submitted as a possible international standard through the W3C Credentials Community Group. https://w3c-ccg.github.io

A number of other W3C Working Groups including W3C Verifiable Claims WG plan on using DIDs, and we will be sharing additional details toward formalizing a standard at TPAC in the fall. https://w3.org/2017/vc/WG/

Over a dozen companies and organizations, using multiple blockchains (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Hyperledger, etc.), have committed to deploying DIDs, including IBM, Microsoft, Digital Bazaar, Consensys, Evernym, Learning Machine, British Columbia, and more: https://www.computerworld.com/article/3267930/how-blockchain-could-solve-the-internet-privacy-problem.html

Articles on Self-Sovereign Identity have appeared in major publications such Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Technology Review, Business Week, and many more. Recent Facebook & Equifax events have continue to keep it in the news: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbloomberg/2017/10/06/can-blockchain-solve-the-equifax-identity-morass-heres-how/?sh=5d05b011296a

How can you support Self-Sovereign Identity? If you are a consumer or influencer, demand that the companies you deal with consider moving to decentralized architectures that support your human rights & dignity. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/04/06/theres-a-facebook-alternative-its-called-self-sovereign-identity/

If you are a blockchain advocate, remember that blockchain, combined with identity, is a two edged sword. The best is we can hold the powerful accountable for their actions. The worst is we weaponize identity against the powerless.

If you are a human-rights supporter, the lack of identity is trapping people in inescapable cycles of poverty. Thus the UN Sustainable Development Goal 16.9 requires that "By 2030, [we] provide legal identity for all, including birth registration". https://impakter.com/digital-identity-basic-human-right/

If you are a writer or communicator, familiarize yourself with the principles of Self-Sovereign Identity. Become part of the dialog to clarify & communicate them more effectively, and help people to understand & support this movement. https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity

If you are a lawyer, take a look at the requirements that the EU's new GDPR regulations will be putting on your company. Ask if your existing identity systems and architectures will be able to address the problem, and if not, recommend research into Self-Sovereign Identity.

If you are a policymaker, consider supporting bringing GDPR class privacy principles into your own jurisdiction. Take a look at British Columbia's experiments with Self-Sovereign Identity. https://www.continuumloop.com/bcgov-verifiable-organization-network/

If you are an identity provider, a “holder” of personal identifiers and data, whether corporate or government, investigate switching to architectures where you instead offer verifiable credentials against the authenticated identifiers of others: https://twitter.com/aniltj/status/977559783975936000

If you are a executive, consider joining one of the many pilot deployments of DIDs to investigate these new Self-Sovereign Identity architectures, and support that development by funding open source initiatives. https://medium.com/uport/uport-year-in-review-whats-to-come-in-2018-15ccb9214439

Many thanks to the communities and individuals that inspired and helped make Self-Sovereign Identity become a movement: #IIW, #RebootingWebOfTrust, #ID2020, W3C Credentials CG, #DIF,
@JoeAndrieu, @Appelcline, @ManuSporny, @DrummondReed, @windley and too many others to list!

Links:

* [Christopher Allen on Twitter: "Self-Sovereign Identity: A Progress Report”…](https://twitter.com/ChristopherA/status/989120215702261761)
* [Christopher Allen on Twitter: "My long read article "The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity" shares a vision and a draft of some principles. Comments? https://t.co/1gkrF2T9Xd" / Twitter](https://twitter.com/ChristopherA/status/724754197762068480)
* [What is "Sovereign Source Authority"? | The Moxy Tongue](https://www.moxytongue.com/2012/02/what-is-sovereign-source-authority.html)
* [The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity](http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html)
* [The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity - CoinDesk](https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2016/04/27/the-path-to-self-sovereign-identity/)
* [Identity 2.0 — ID2020](https://web.archive.org/web/20170502022758/http://id2020.org:80/news/2016/12/2/identity-20)
* [The Three Models of Digital Identity Relationships | by Timothy Ruff | Evernym | Medium](https://medium.com/evernym/the-three-models-of-digital-identity-relationships-ca0727cb5186)
* [#Consensus2022 on Twitter: "Identity of the Blockchain: Perils and Promise - @ChristopherA, @Blockstream #Consensus2016 https://t.co/71h5NhdOWJ https://t.co/LJE8fQ6X8J" / Twitter](https://twitter.com/consensus2022/status/730487202082361345/)
* [Identity of the Blockchain: Perils and Promise](https://www.slideshare.net/ChristopherA/identity-of-the-blockchain-perils-and-promise)
* [self-sovereign-identity/self-sovereign-identity-principles.md at master · WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity/blob/master/self-sovereign-identity-principles.md)
* [Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations](https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights)
* [https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Blockchain-for-Development.pdf](https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Blockchain-for-Development.pdf)
* [GDPR - A reflection on the “self-sovereign identity” and the Blockchain](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/gdpr-reflection-self-sovereign-identity-blockchain-nicolas-ameye/)
* [rwot5-boston/did-primer.md at master · WebOfTrustInfo/rwot5-boston](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot5-boston/blob/master/draft-documents/did-primer.md)
* [Can Blockchain Solve The Equifax Identity Morass? Here's How](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbloomberg/2017/10/06/can-blockchain-solve-the-equifax-identity-morass-heres-how/?sh=5d05b011296a)
* [There's A Facebook Alternative, It's Called Self-Sovereign Identity - CoinDesk](https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/04/06/theres-a-facebook-alternative-its-called-self-sovereign-identity/)
* [Digital Identity As a Basic Human Right - Impakter](https://impakter.com/digital-identity-basic-human-right/)
* [WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity: Articles and documents associated with designing and implementing identity technology using self-sovereign identity principles](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity)
* [BCGov Verifiable Organization Network - Impressive Client Demo - Continuum Loop Inc.](https://www.continuumloop.com/bcgov-verifiable-organization-network/)
* [How blockchain could solve the internet privacy problem | Computerworld](https://www.computerworld.com/article/3267930/how-blockchain-could-solve-the-internet-privacy-problem.html)
* [uPort Year in Review + What’s to Come in 2018 | by uPort | uPort | Medium](https://medium.com/uport/uport-year-in-review-whats-to-come-in-2018-15ccb9214439)

Self-Sovereign Identity: 5th Anniversary (2021)

Five years ago, I published "The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity", which laid out the idea of a new sort of user-controlled identity, expanding on ideas from visionaries before me. http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html (2016-04-25)

To celebrate that anniversary, I published a new article today that takes a look at where self-sovereign identity has gone in the five years since. https://twitter.com/CoinDesk/status/1386709198579322883
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/04/26/self-sovereign-identity-5-years-on/

I think the principles in the original article have proven the most important element. That's existence, control, access, transparency, persistence, portability, interoperability, consent, minimalization, and protection. They've allowed global conversation about SSI. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ez6Ybo1UYAESzjX?format=jpg&name=medium

But I've also been pleased to see self-sovereignty become a general goal for all sorts of digital assets: asset holders *want* the autonomy to make their own decisions without interference from third parties or gatekeepers.

Today, Verifiable Credentials are an international standards as a W3C Recommendation (https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/) and DIDs are now a W3C Candidate Recommendation (https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/). Those are the building blocks for SSI! [6/13]

We've also got an expansive and healthy ecosystem centered around not just W3C, but also DIF and the Linux Foundation's Hyperledger Indy. This is the blend of competition and cooperation that will lead to real innovation in the space!

Is there room for improvement? Sure. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BbkBX-tUgifiS_VKcqCZYRTQAGF5pK-JEYQwmHYbMcI/edit#slide=id.g442085c4c7_0_546

The tight ties between DID methods and specific ledgers could lead to challenges, but our new rubric should help to resolve that issue. [9/13] https://w3c.github.io/did-rubric/

I'd also like to see more attention paid to trust-minimized identity, which are centered on anonymity and peer-to-peer interactions to support more vulnerable individuals such as refugees and those who are discriminated against.

Finally, we must remember that though DIDs and VCs may be a requirement to fulfill the principles of self-soveriegn identity, they are not sufficient by themselves. More work is needed to ensure privacy and human rights!

But what we've done already is amazing. Happy Fifth Birthday, Self-Sovereign Identity!

For more new details on all of this work that we've done and all the advancements we've seen, please see my full article. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/04/26/self-sovereign-identity-5-years-on/

LInks:

* [Christopher Allen on Twitter: "Five years ago, I published "The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity", which laid out the idea of a new sort of user-controlled identity, expanding on ideas from visionaries before me. [1/13] https://t.co/4haZsOzr7R" / Twitter](https://twitter.com/ChristopherA/status/1386715286913486857)
* [The Path to Self-Sovereign Identity - CoinDesk](https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2016/04/27/the-path-to-self-sovereign-identity/)
* [CoinDesk on Twitter: ""How could we square the circle, widening access to digital identity, yet making sure it was something that was controlled by us, not by huge megacorps? My answer was self-sovereign identity." Opinion @ChristopherA @BlockchainComns #identity https://t.co/aE2OCXWu6d" / Twitter](https://twitter.com/CoinDesk/status/1386709198579322883)
* [Christopher Allen - Self-Sovereign Identity, 5 Years On - CoinDesk](https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/04/26/self-sovereign-identity-5-years-on/)
* [Ez6Ybo1UYAESzjX 960×540 pixels](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ez6Ybo1UYAESzjX?format=jpg&name=medium)
* [Verifiable Credentials Data Model v1.1](https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/)
* [Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0](https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/)
* [SSI: The Bleeding Edges - Google Slides](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BbkBX-tUgifiS_VKcqCZYRTQAGF5pK-JEYQwmHYbMcI/edit#slide=id.g442085c4c7_0_546)
* [DID Method Rubric v1.0](https://w3c.github.io/did-rubric/)
*

Self-Sovereign Identity Principles
1. Existence. Users must have an independent existence. Any self-sovereign identity is ultimately based on the ineffable “I” that’s at the heart of identity. It can never exist wholly in digital form. This must be the kernel of self that is upheld and supported. A self-sovereign identity simply makes public and accessible some limited aspects of the “I” that already exists.
2. Control. Users must control their identities.Subject to well-understood and secure algorithms that ensure the continued validity of an identity and its claims, the user is the ultimate authority on their identity. They should always be able to refer to it, update it, or even hide it. They must be able to choose celebrity or privacy as they prefer. This doesn’t mean that a user controls all of the claims on their identity: other users may make claims about a user, but they should not be central to the identity itself.
3. Access. Users must have access to their own data. A user must always be able to easily retrieve all the claims and other data within his identity. There must be no hidden data and no gatekeepers. This does not mean that a user can necessarily modify all the claims associated with his identity, but it does mean they should be aware of them. It also does not mean that users have equal access to others’ data, only to their own.
4. Transparency. Systems and algorithms must be transparent. The systems used to administer and operate a network of identities must be open, both in how they function and in how they are managed and updated. The algorithms should be free, open-source, well-known, and as independent as possible of any particular architecture; anyone should be able to examine how they work.
5. Persistence. Identities must be long-lived.Preferably, identities should last forever, or at least for as long as the user wishes. Though private keys might need to be rotated and data might need to be changed, the identity remains. In the fast-moving world of the Internet, this goal may not be entirely reasonable, so at the least identities should last until they’ve been outdated by newer identity systems. This must not contradict a “right to be forgotten”; a user should be able to dispose of an identity if he wishes and claims should be modified or removed as appropriate over time. To do this requires a firm separation between an identity and its claims: they can't be tied forever.
6. Portability. Information and services about identity must be transportable. Identities must not be held by a singular third-party entity, even if it's a trusted entity that is expected to work in the best interest of the user. The problem is that entities can disappear — and on the Internet, most eventually do. Regimes may change, users may move to different jurisdictions. Transportable identities ensure that the user remains in control of his identity no matter what, and can also improve an identity’s persistence over time.
7. Interoperability. Identities should be as widely usable as possible. Identities are of little value if they only work in limited niches. The goal of a 21st-century digital identity system is to make identity information widely available, crossing international boundaries to create global identities, without losing user control. Thanks to persistence and autonomy these widely available identities can then become continually available.
8. Consent. Users must agree to the use of their identity. Any identity system is built around sharing that identity and its claims, and an interoperable system increases the amount of sharing that occurs. However, sharing of data must only occur with the consent of the user. Though other users such as an employer, a credit bureau, or a friend might present claims, the user must still offer consent for them to become valid. Note that this consent might not be interactive, but it must still be deliberate and well-understood.
9. Minimalization. Disclosure of claims must be minimized. When data is disclosed, that disclosure should involve the minimum amount of data necessary to accomplish the task at hand. For example, if only a minimum age is called for, then the exact age should not be disclosed, and if only an age is requested, then the more precise date of birth should not be disclosed. This principle can be supported with selective disclosure, range proofs, and other zero-knowledge techniques, but non-correlatibility is still a very hard (perhaps impossible) task; the best we can do is to use minimalization to support privacy as best as possible.
10. Protection. The rights of users must be protected. When there is a conflict between the needs of the identity network and the rights of individual users, then the network should err on the side of preserving the freedoms and rights of the individuals over the needs of the network. To ensure this, identity authentication must occur through independent algorithms that are censorship-resistant and force-resilient and that are run in a decentralized manner.

“I seek your assistance in taking these principles to the next level”

https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity

Saved at 2022-02-22 08:29
- [WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity: Articles and documents associated with designing and implementing identity technology using self-sovereign identity principles](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity)
- [Revising Principle "Existence. Users must have an independent existence." · Issue #6 · WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity/issues/6)
- [Revising Principle "Control. Users must control their identities." · Issue #8 · WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity/issues/8)
- [Revising Principle "Portability. Information and services about identity must be transportable." · Issue #13 · WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/self-sovereign-identity/issues/13)

Some Definitions

Identifier: A label that refers to an entity and can be used to establish or maintain an identity. For example, a name or UID.

Identity: A conceptual construct that enables the differentiation between distinct entities that are individually considered to be unique, but which may possess class or group characteristics. An identity gives these entities the ability to interact as peers in collaborative or competitive ways. It is not the entity that it represents.

Identity, Digital: A digital representation of an entity, managed by digital tools, over which that entity has personal or delegated control.

Identity, Digital (Wyoming Revised): “The intangible digital representation of, by and for a natural person, over which he has principal authority and through which he intentionally communicates or acts.

Identity, Functional: How we recognize, remember and respond to specific people and things.

SSI: Self-sovereign identity. A decentralized digital identity that does not depend on any centralized authority and whose information is portable.

SSI Quotes

“Self-Sovereign Identity is both an ideology to reclaim human dignity and authority in the digital world and an emerging suite of technologies designed to enable that movement.”
– Christopher Allen

“As digital systems create representations of us, a free society demands that we be given a voice in deciding how those representations are created and used. Not because we own that data, but because individual human beings are the ONLY valid source for that moral authority.

Human dignity demands that individuals be treated with respect no matter which system they interact with, face-to-face or online. Without that, we become nothing but data in the machine—entries in a ledger to be managed, problems to be solved, digital serfs. We are not.”
– Christopher Allen

“Self-sovereignty applies in the real world — We all have inherent dignity independent of our birth place, lineage, or labels, simply because we are human.

In our physical world the state can’t violate a natural person’s physical and mental integrity, and general violate or coerce the dignity of a human being, except when that person risks the physical, mental integrity of others. We as natural persons have other rights such as freedom of speech, of assembly, and association with who we want — again, with the limits that it doesn’t harm others.

The 10 principles of Digital Self-Sovereign Identity attempt to bring that real-world self-sovereignty to the virtual world. But since there is no “locality” with your digital identity we have to be more careful about the control, coercion, and undue influence of others.”
– Christopher Allen

"Human dignity demands that individuals be treated with respect no matter which system they interact with, whether face-to-face or digitally online. Without that, we become nothing but data in the machine — entries in a ledger to be managed, problems to be solved, digital serfs. We are not."
— Christopher Allen, Co-Founder & Chairman Rebooting Web of Trust

“Granting control of digital identity to centralized authorities of the online world suffers from the same problems caused by the state authorities of the physical world: users are locked in to a single authority who can deny their identity or even confirm a false identity. Centralization innately gives power to the centralized entities, not to the users.”
– Christopher Allen

“If you are a blockchain advocate, remember that blockchain, combined with identity, is a two edged sword. The best is we can hold the powerful accountable for their actions. The worst is we weaponize identity against the powerless.”
— Christopher Allen (2018)

“Identity can be a double-edged sword — usable for both beneficial and maleficent purposes. Thus, an identity system must balance transparency, fairness, and support of the commons with protection for the individual.”
— Christopher Allen (2016)

“Separate and apart from what happens to our data, what are the rights that adhere and attach to us as people in this human experience, both individually, collectively and on a societal level? If we don’t take this step back, we lose sight of the human dignity dimension.”
– Elizabeth Renieris

“Personal data cannot be separated from the individual,It’s such a deep aspect of oneself, of one’s human dignity, of one’s identity, and this deep indicator of who we are and our own autonomous presence in the world… when we are dealing with something so physically and conceptually inseparable from ourselves, it’s really not even capable of being transferred to others, nor is it a tangible commodifiable thing.’”
– Elizabeth Renieris

“In 10 years nobody will care that the advent of self-sovereign identity created a seismic shift in both technology and the balance of power. What they will care about is that their lives have been improved. They won’t talk about privacy, security, and other things that we talk about.
And somebody, in 10 years, is going to say “Really? You let a big company control your identity and monitor everything you did? Why would you do that?”. – Darrell O’Donnel

“sovereignty is a resource each person combines with that of others to create society.” — Phil Windley (source)

“Privacy isn't about hiding bad things. It's about protecting what makes us humans: our day-to-day behavior, our personality, our fears, our relationships, and our vulnerabilities. Everyone deserves privacy online.” — EFF

““At the moment during the Covid-19 crisis much of our public life is forced to become digital. This requires the right value based technological discussions to be held. Even more than before this crisis.”
- Wouter Welling, Netherlands Policy Officer, Digital Government

"Digital human rights are a recent topic and they still need to be developed to a great extent. SSI is an essential part of that. More security, more privacy; these are very important parts of digital human rights..." — Rhodia Maas, General director of the National Office for Identity Data, the Netherlands

Principal Authority

https://www.blockchaincommons.com/articles/Principal-Authority/

Identity, Digital (Wyoming Revised): “The intangible digital representation of, by and for a natural person, over which he has principal authority and through which he intentionally communicates or acts.

The Rights of Self-Sovereign Authority

Some principles of self-sovereign identity are implicit in the idea of a Principal.
1. Existence. The definition of Principal requires that there be a real entity at an identity’s heart.
2. Control. The definition of Principal Authority says that the Principal always retains control of an identity, within specifically defined boundaries, no matter who is holding it at a particular time.
3. Persistence. Because of their uncontested Principal Authority, a Principal may decide to have an identity last for as long as they see fit.
4. Consent. Anything that happens within the defined boundaries of the digital identity is implicitly with the consent of the Principal, who may delegate or revoke Principal Authority at any time.
Self-sovereign rights recognize that an identity exists to benefit its Principal. These core principles likely derive explicitly from a definition of digital identity such as that created by the Wyoming legislature.

The Duties of Self-Sovereign Identity

The remaining principles of self-sovereign identity can be stated as duties owed to a Principal by an agent who has been granted Principal Authority over an identity for certain purposes.

1. Access. An agent must provide the Principal with access to data related to their digital identity.
2. Transparency. An agent must be open about how they will administer a digital identity.
3. Portability. An agent must make a digital identity portable upon the request of the Principal.
4. Interoperability. An agent must use standard, interoperable protocols when making an identity portable, and should also use those interoperable protocols when interacting with other identity systems.
5. Minimization. An agent must minimize the data collected, stored, transmitted, and shared regarding an identity so that it only includes data that is strictly necessary in the context of a request made by the Principal.
6. Protection. An agent must place the protection of the identity above their own needs or desires.

Identity duties says that agents will tell you how they’re using your identity, use it in the most minimalist way possible, and make it easy for you to reclaim the identity. However, legislation may be required to turn these best practices into duties bound by law.

The Duties of Self-Sovereign Agents

The idea of Principal Authority itself suggests additional duties that were not included on the original list of principles of self-sovereign identity, but which are generally defined in the Laws of Agency to be due from agents to Principals.

1. Specificity. An Agent will use Principal Authority to serve specific tasks as instructed by the Principal, or as required by Custom, and do nothing more with an identity.
2. Responsibility. An agent will serve those tasks with reasonable care and skill, with due diligence, and without further delegation.
3. Representation. An agent will act in the best interests of the Principal, without secret profit, and will not take on other responsibilities that might conflict with that.
4. Fidelity. An agent will serve those tasks in good faith.
5. Disclosure. An agent will maintain accounts and report their actions back to the Principal.
6.
Agent duties say that agents will be trustworthy in their use of your identity. These duties are more likely to implicitly be a part of any legislation that was built atop the Laws of Agency.

Laws of Custom
To start with, the Laws of Agency are largely built on Laws of Custom, which are as likely to be common law as any formally codified legislation. When creating new laws related to self-sovereign identity, we’ll be creating new Laws of Customs for the digital frontier, an area that’s so fresh that the tradition of customs has been limited.

This creates real challenges, as we must decide what customs we want to create and then we must develop them from common law to legal customs to (eventually) codified duties. We can integrate these with the Laws of Agency, and we can figure out how that interrelates with old common laws such as the Use Laws. We may even need special courts to set these common laws and achieve remedies, such as the Court of Chancery.

Fundamentally, there’s a lot of work to be done here; recognizing the existence of a Principal and the use of delegatable Principal Authority bound by the Laws of Agency is just a starting place. New customs, even though understood as best practices, will not automatically become legal duties.

——

DHS Department of Homeland Security “ensure there is no vendor lock-in and there are multiple vendors with interoperable solutions from which we can buy”

—
I found this paper interesting by ethicist Georgy Ishmaev on the topic of the ethics of blockchain markets (highlights my own): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13347-019-00361-y

There are indeed valid moral reasons, as suggested by Sandel (2013), to take a critical stance on the diffusion of market relations into all spheres of human life. First, market modes of valuation do not always guarantee a fair distribution of market goods to those who value them the most. Secondly, there is a risk that good, activity, or social practice can be corrupted by commodification being reduced to a single mode of valuation. Thus, it can be argued that even within the constraints of utilitarian justification suggested by the proponents of propertization, their arguments are far from compelling. This criticism of propertization, however, is primarily expressed in the context of legal frameworks. Hence, given that blockchain-enabled application has already introduced qualitatively new types of property, and new types of regulation, reconsideration of these arguments may be warranted in a new technological context (Ishmaev 2017; Reijers and Coeckelbergh 2018; Filippi and Hassan 2018).

And indeed, it has been argued that blockchain technology can reshape data markets in a truly radical fashion, warranting a reconsideration of criticisms (Koutroumpis et al. 2017). Such new multilateral markets, as argued, can provide transparent chains of provenance and enforceable usage restrictions, alleviating the majority of concerns associated with private data trading. Another argument presented by the proponents of propertization is the observation that whether we consider commodification of private data desirable or not, de facto such markets already exist, and they cannot be undone. Thus, as argues Pentland (2009), the pragmatic approach is to try and make these markets fairer with the help of tools that enhance individual data ownership.

From the perspective of moral philosophy, this later argument does not hold any ground on its own. The fact that some practice is ubiquitous in society does not make it necessarily acceptable or desirable. However, one can inquire if this practice can be altered in such a way that makes it acceptable or even desirable. Rössler (2015) makes a case for the moral acceptability of “incomplete commodification” of private data, arguing that private data can be treated as a market commodity within certain limits. The task for ethics, argues Rossler, is to criticize tradability if it becomes harmful or injurious in order to guide limitations of the market in personal data.Footnote 4 So the main question here is whether these new technologically enabled regimes of property in data could address the ethical issues of privacy for IoT users and tackle negative aspects of data propertization.

The author also has another paper out that was interesting to me, in that it does a better job than I to describe what and why the concept of "sovereignty" is in the identity equation: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-020-09563-x

 the call to reconsider the source of this right aims to reframe the procedure of an identification not as an obligation or duty of citizens to be identified derived from the sovereign right of a state, but as a natural right of an individual to be represented via mediating role of institutions of identity.
…
strong ontological interpretation of personal identity understood in informational terms, where an individual is not just represented by one’s personal information but effectively constituted by an information about oneself. From that perspective, the unique dynamic status of personal identity defines a moral content of informational privacy as a matter of construction of one’s own informational identity. An individual’s freedom to mould one’s identity, the freedom to build a different and possibly better self, goes against the artificial ‘mummification’ of identity represented in records and profiles, which takes the power to construct one’s identity away from an individual.
…
There are then compelling reasons to consider the right to be a ‘self-sovereign’ source of power to construe one’s own identity. Not just a right for the choice of attributes relevant for the presentation of one’s own identity to others, but also a right not to have one’s identity be permanently fixated in the externally imposed normative framework. The foundation of this right can be traced back to Lockean arguments on the limits of powers and rights in a free society.

—

Zero Trust Architecture:
NIST https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-207/final
Away from “trust but verify”, or instance within a firewall, and instead continuously monitor and validate that a user and their device has the right privileges and attributes.

—
GDPR

* Introduction to Self-Sovereign Identity and GDPR  https://www.selfsovereignidentity.it/introduction-to-self-sovereign-identity-and-gdpr/
* European Blockchain Services Infrastructure GDPR assessment report (relevant to SSI) https://ec.europa.eu/digital-building-blocks/wikis/download/attachments/385876854/EBSI_GDPR_assessment_report.pdf?api=v2
* European Data Protection Supervisor comments on identity management systems https://edps.europa.eu/system/files/2021-07/21-07-28_formal_comments_2021-0598_d-1609_european_digital_identity_en.pdf
* Paper on GDPR application to SSI https://new-dl.gi.de/bitstream/handle/20.500.12116/36505/proceedings-08.pdf?sequence=1

* Innovation Meets Compliance Data Privacy Regulation and Distributed Ledger Technology https://sovrin.org/wp-content/uploads/GDPR-Paper_V1.pdf
* Is Self-Sovereign Identity the Answer to GDPR Compliance? https://www.r3.com/blog/is-self-sovereign-identity-the-answer-to-gdpr-compliance/

eIDAS

* eIDAS Regulation https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eidas-regulation
* eIDAS Text https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R0910&qid=1645495324574

SSI by ChatGPT

Self-sovereignty is the idea that individuals have the right to control and be masters their own lives & actions, and make decisions that are in their own best interests about their identity, data, and assets. It is a concept that is closely tied to the idea of individual freedom and autonomy.

Self-sovereignty is important for human rights & dignity because it empowers individuals to exercise their rights without interference from others, including governments and other powerful institutions. This means that individuals can freely express themselves, associate with others, to live their lives in accordance with their own values and beliefs, and pursue their own goals and interests without fear of reprisal or discrimination.

The limits of self-sovereignty are determined by the rights and interests of others. In other words, individuals cannot assert their self-sovereignty in a way that infringes on the rights or wellbeing of others.

For example, an individual cannot claim self-sovereignty to justify violence or harm against others. Similarly, an individual cannot claim self-sovereignty to justify discrimination or other forms of exploitation or oppression.

Ultimately, self-sovereignty is essential for ensuring that individuals have the freedom, autonomy and dignity to live their lives as they see fit, and it is an important foundation for a just and fair society. In addition, self-sovereignty can promote more efficient and fair economic and social systems, as individuals are able to freely exchange value and make decisions without the need for intermediaries or centralized authorities.

---

Self-sovereign identity is a digital identity that is owned and controlled by the individual, rather than by a central authority or third-party. This means that individuals have the power to determine who has access to their personal information, and how that information is used and shared.

Self-sovereign identity is based on the principles of self-sovereignty and decentralized control. This means that individuals have full control over their own digital identity, and are not subject to the control or influence of external forces.

Self-sovereign identity systems allow individuals to securely and privately manage their own personal information, and to use that information to interact with others and access services in a secure and decentralized manner. This can help to protect individuals' privacy and autonomy, and to enable them to assert their own control over their personal information.

Digital privacy and self-sovereign identity are crucial for protecting against abuses of power. In today's world, where we increasingly live our lives online and share personal information on a regular basis, it's more important than ever to take control of our digital identities and protect our privacy.

One of the biggest threats to our digital privacy is the growing power of big tech companies and governments. These entities have access to vast amounts of personal information, and they can use it to track our activities, monitor our behavior, and even manipulate our opinions. This kind of surveillance is a direct threat to our autonomy and freedom, and it has the potential to be abused by those in power.

Self-sovereign identity offers a solution to this problem. By allowing individuals to control their own digital identities, self-sovereign identity empowers people to protect their privacy and maintain control over their personal information. This kind of decentralized approach to identity management makes it much harder for governments and tech companies to track and manipulate people, and it gives individuals the power to control who has access to their personal data.

In addition to protecting against abuses of power, digital privacy and self-sovereign identity are also important for promoting democracy and equality. When people are able to control their own digital identities, they are able to participate in online discourse and political decision-making without fear of being targeted or silenced. This kind of open and inclusive online environment is essential for fostering a healthy democracy and promoting equal opportunities for all.

Overall, digital privacy and self-sovereign identity are crucial for protecting against abuses of power and promoting democracy and equality. By taking control of our digital identities and protecting our privacy, we can protect ourselves against the growing power of governments and tech companies, and we can help create a more open and inclusive online environment.

===

In today's digital age, the importance of protecting our digital privacy and ensuring self-sovereign identity cannot be overstated. With the rise of the far-right and their efforts to change government policies, it is essential that we take steps to safeguard ourselves against abuses of power, human rights violations, and threats of regime change.
Digital privacy is crucial in protecting against abuses of power by the far-right. The ability to collect and analyze vast amounts of data has given rise to a new era of surveillance and control, allowing those in power to monitor and manipulate the actions and beliefs of individuals and groups. By ensuring that our personal information remains private and inaccessible to those who seek to use it against us, we can safeguard ourselves against the potential abuses of power that come with this new digital landscape.
Self-sovereign identity is also crucial in protecting against abuses of power and human rights violations by the far-right. In a world where our personal information is constantly collected and shared, it is essential that we have control over our own identities. By ensuring that our personal information is not collected and shared without our consent, we can protect ourselves against the potential abuses of power that come with being vulnerable to others' control over our identities.
Furthermore, the ability to control our own digital identities can also protect against threats of regime change by the far-right. In a world where the far-right is increasingly seeking to gain power and influence through the manipulation of information and the control of individuals' identities, self-sovereign identity can provide a powerful tool for individuals to resist and protect against these threats. By ensuring that our personal information is not collected and shared without our consent, we can protect ourselves against the potential abuses of power that come with being vulnerable to others' control over our identities.
In conclusion, the importance of digital privacy and self-sovereign identity cannot be overstated in protecting against abuses of power, human rights violations, and threats of regime change by the far-right. By safeguarding our personal information and ensuring control over our own digital identities, we can protect ourselves against the potential abuses of power and threats to our rights and freedoms in this digital age.

==

1. In the event of regime change, the new government may not recognize or respect the digital human rights of individuals, leading to censorship and surveillance of online activities.
2. The new government may implement policies and laws that restrict access to certain websites and online platforms, limiting the ability of individuals to freely express themselves and access information.
3. The new government may attempt to control or manipulate online content and discussions, leading to the suppression of dissenting voices and the spread of misinformation.
4. The new government may engage in cyber attacks and other forms of online harassment against individuals or organizations that oppose its policies or ideologies.
5. The new government may use digital technologies to repress political opposition and suppress public protests, leading to violations of human rights and the suppression of civil liberties.
6. The new government may establish policies and laws that allow for the collection and use of personal data without proper consent or oversight, leading to privacy violations and the potential for abuse of power.
7. The new government may engage in the targeted surveillance of certain individuals or groups, such as political dissidents, journalists, and activists, violating their right to privacy and freedom of expression.
8. The new government may interfere with the operation of the internet and other digital networks, disrupting access to information and communication and hindering the ability of individuals to exercise their digital human rights.

==

1. Mass surveillance: Governments can use digital technology, such as cameras and surveillance software, to monitor the actions and movements of their citizens without their consent. This can lead to a violation of privacy and the right to freedom of expression.
2. Censorship: Governments can use digital technology to block or filter certain websites and online content, limiting access to information and restricting the right to freedom of expression.
3. Discrimination: Governments can use digital technology to collect and analyze data on individuals, which can be used to target and discriminate against certain groups based on their race, gender, religion, or other factors.
4. Repression: Governments can use digital technology, such as social media monitoring tools, to identify and silence political dissidents and suppress the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
5. Cyber attacks: Governments can use digital technology to launch cyber attacks against other countries or individuals, causing harm and destruction to infrastructure and data, and violating the right to security and privacy.

===

2 / 2

1. Surveillance and invasion of privacy: Governments can use digital technology to monitor and collect personal data of individuals without their consent, violating their right to privacy.
2. Discrimination and bias: Digital technology can be used to target certain groups of individuals based on their race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or other factors, leading to discrimination and unequal treatment.
3. Censorship and suppression of free speech: Governments can use digital technology to censor or restrict access to information, limiting the freedom of expression and ability to access diverse perspectives and opinions.
4. Disproportionate use of force: Governments can use digital technology, such as facial recognition software and drones, to enhance their surveillance and control capabilities, potentially leading to excessive use of force and violations of the right to life and security of the person.
5. Access to justice: Digital technology can create barriers to accessing justice for certain individuals, such as those with limited digital literacy or those living in rural or remote areas with limited access to technology.
6. Economic inequality: The use of digital technology can exacerbate economic inequality, as certain individuals or communities may not have access to or be able to afford the technology, leading to further marginalization and disadvantage.

===

1. The Holocaust: During World War II, the Nazi government in Germany used technology, such as gas chambers and crematoriums, to systematically kill millions of Jews, Romani, homosexuals, disabled individuals, and other minority groups. This was a massive violation of human rights and a horrific example of the use of technology for evil purposes.
2. Soviet Union's use of technology for surveillance and control: The Soviet government used a variety of technological tools, such as wiretapping and secret police, to monitor and control its citizens. This included the use of technology to suppress political dissent and to punish those who spoke out against the government.
3. East Germany's use of the Berlin Wall: In the late 1960s, the East German government built the Berlin Wall to physically divide the city and prevent its citizens from fleeing to the West. This wall, which was constructed using technology such as concrete and barbed wire, was a clear violation of human rights, as it effectively trapped people in a repressive and authoritarian state.
4. U.S. government's use of technology for surveillance: In the post-9/11 era, the U.S. government has used technology, such as the National Security Agency's PRISM program, to collect massive amounts of data on its citizens for the purposes of surveillance and control. This has raised concerns about privacy and the potential for abuse of power by the government.
5. China's use of technology for censorship and control: The Chinese government has used technology, such as the Great Firewall of China, to censor and control the flow of information within the country. This has included blocking access to websites and social media platforms, as well as using technology to monitor and punish individuals who speak out against the government.
6. In North Korea, the government uses technology such as listening devices and satellite imagery to monitor its citizens and control their movements, violating their right to privacy and freedom of movement.
===

1. Loss of privacy and personal freedom.
2. Restriction of free speech and expression.
3. Disruption of economic and social activities.
4. Potential for abuse and misuse of personal data by the government or other entities.
5. Increased vulnerability to cyber attacks and data breaches.
6. Potential for increased government surveillance and control.
7. Decreased innovation and creativity due to censorship and control of online content.
8. Negative impact on international relations and cooperation.
9. Potential for discrimination and unequal treatment based on online behavior and personal data.

===

Digital privacy is important because it allows individuals to have control over their personal information and data. It ensures that personal information is not shared without consent and protects against unauthorized access, use, and disclosure of sensitive information. This is important for individuals to maintain their autonomy and dignity, as well as to prevent identity theft, financial fraud, and other forms of cybercrime. Digital privacy is also crucial for protecting free speech and the ability to express oneself freely online without fear of retribution.

===

what is self-sovereignty and why is it important?

Self-sovereignty is the concept that individuals have the right to control their own lives and make their own decisions without interference from external forces. This includes the ability to control one's own identity, personal information, and assets.

Self-sovereignty is important because it allows individuals to maintain their autonomy and dignity, and to make decisions that are in their own best interests. It also enables individuals to have agency and control over their own lives, which is essential for personal growth and well-being. In addition, self-sovereignty helps to promote equality and fairness by allowing individuals to have equal opportunities to make decisions and take actions that affect their lives.

—

What is self-sovereign identity and why is it important.

Self-sovereign identity refers to a digital identity that is owned and controlled by an individual, rather than by a centralized authority. This means that individuals have the ability to control how their personal information is shared and used online.
Self-sovereign identity is important because it gives individuals more control over their own personal information, and allows them to securely and privately share only the information that they choose to. This can help protect people's privacy and security online, and can also make it easier for people to access services and conduct transactions online. It can also help to reduce fraud and improve trust in online interactions.

—

What is self-sovereign identity and how the Laws of Agency apply to it.

Self-sovereign identity is a digital identity that is owned and controlled by an individual, rather than being assigned and managed by a centralized authority. This type of identity allows individuals to have more control over their personal information and how it is shared, and it can be used to access services and transactions online.
The Laws of Agency, which are a set of legal principles governing the relationship between a principal and an agent, apply to self-sovereign identity in several ways. First, the individual who owns and controls their own self-sovereign identity is the principal, and any entities or organizations that they choose to share their identity with are their agents. This means that the principal has the power to decide who has access to their identity, and the agents are obligated to use the information in accordance with the principal's instructions and consent.
Additionally, the Laws of Agency state that the principal is responsible for the actions of their agents, which means that the individual is ultimately responsible for the security and privacy of their self-sovereign identity. This may include ensuring that their identity is not shared with unauthorized parties, and that their personal information is not used for fraudulent purposes.
Overall, the Laws of Agency provide a legal framework for individuals to maintain control over their digital identity, and to hold others accountable for the proper use of their personal information.



What are the duties of agents under the law of agency, and how do they apply to self-sovereign identity.

The duties of agents under the law of agency include:
1. Loyalty: Agents are required to act in the best interests of their principal, and to avoid conflicts of interest that could harm the principal's interests.
2. Care: Agents are required to act with reasonable care and skill when carrying out their duties on behalf of the principal.
3. Obedience: Agents are required to follow the instructions and policies of the principal, and to not take any actions that would be contrary to the principal's wishes.
4. Confidentiality: Agents are required to keep any confidential information they receive from the principal private, and to not disclose it to third parties without the principal's consent.
These duties apply to self-sovereign identity in several ways. For example, when an individual shares their self-sovereign identity with an agent (such as a service provider), the agent has a duty to act in the individual's best interests and to protect their personal information. This means that the agent must use the individual's identity in a way that is consistent with the individual's instructions and preferences, and must not use it for any unauthorized purposes.
Additionally, the duty of care requires the agent to take reasonable steps to protect the individual's identity and personal information from unauthorized access or use. This may include implementing security measures to prevent identity theft or fraud, and ensuring that the individual's information is not shared with unauthorized parties.
Overall, the duties of agents under the law of agency help to protect the individual's control over their self-sovereign identity, and to hold agents accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's personal information.



How are these duties superior to Property Law to improve self-sovereign identity.

The duties of agents under the law of agency are superior to property law in improving self-sovereign identity in several ways.
First, the duties of agents are focused on protecting the individual's rights and interests, rather than just the ownership of their personal information. This means that the individual has more control over how their identity is used, and can hold agents accountable for any actions that violate their instructions or preferences.
Second, the duties of agents provide a more comprehensive legal framework for protecting personal information. Property law is focused on the ownership and transfer of tangible assets, and may not provide sufficient legal protections for intangible assets like digital identities. The duties of agents, on the other hand, provide clear guidance on how agents should handle personal information, and how they can be held accountable for any breaches of trust or confidentiality.
Third, the duties of agents are more flexible and adaptable than property law, which can be slow to respond to changes in technology or the law. This allows the law of agency to keep pace with the rapid evolution of self-sovereign identity, and to provide individuals with the legal protections they need to maintain control over their digital identities.
Overall, the duties of agents under the law of agency provide a more effective legal framework for improving self-sovereign identity, and for protecting the rights and interests of individuals who own and control their own digital identities.



detail an advocacy action plan for advocacy to leverage agency law for self-sovereign identity.

An advocacy action plan to leverage agency law for self-sovereign identity could include the following steps:
1. Research and analysis: Conduct research to understand the current state of agency law and how it relates to self-sovereign identity. This could include reviewing existing laws and regulations, as well as consulting with legal experts and other stakeholders to identify gaps or inconsistencies.
2. Develop a clear and compelling message: Create a clear and compelling message that explains the benefits of agency law for self-sovereign identity, and how it can help protect individuals' rights and interests. This message should be easy to understand and persuasive, and should highlight the potential benefits for individuals, businesses, and society as a whole.
3. Identify target audiences and stakeholders: Identify the key audiences and stakeholders who can help advance the cause of agency law for self-sovereign identity. This could include policymakers, legal experts, industry leaders, and advocacy groups.
4. Develop outreach and engagement strategies: Develop strategies to engage with target audiences and stakeholders, and to build support for the adoption of agency law for self-sovereign identity. This could include outreach through social media, public speaking engagements, and other forms of communication.
5. Monitor and evaluate: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the advocacy action plan, and make adjustments as needed. This could include tracking key metrics such as the number of individuals who support the cause, the number of policymakers who have been engaged, and the level of media attention that the issue has received.
Overall, this advocacy action plan seeks to leverage agency law to improve self-sovereign identity, and to help protect individuals' rights and interests in their digital identities. By conducting research, developing a clear and compelling message, and engaging with key stakeholders, this plan aims to build support and momentum for the adoption of agency law for self-sovereign identity.



What are the 10 principles of self-sovereign identity?

1. Ownership: An individual has the right to own and control their own digital identity.
2. Control: An individual has the right to decide how and when their digital identity is used, and to revoke access to it at any time.
3. Transparency: An individual has the right to know how their digital identity is being used, and to be notified of any changes or updates to it.
4. Security: An individual has the right to have their digital identity protected from unauthorized access or use.
5. Privacy: An individual has the right to have their personal information kept private, and to control how it is shared with others.
6. Portability: An individual has the right to use their digital identity across multiple platforms and services, without being tied to a specific provider or system.
7. Interoperability: An individual has the right to use their digital identity in a way that is compatible with other systems and standards.
8. Inclusivity: An individual has the right to access services and transactions, regardless of their location, language, or socio-economic status.
9. Non-discrimination: An individual has the right to use their digital identity without being subject to discrimination or unequal treatment.
10. Accountability: An individual has the right to hold others accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's digital identity, and to seek redress for any violations of their rights.



reframe the 10th principle under Agency Law

Under Agency Law, the 10th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
10. Accountability: An individual has the right to hold agents accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's digital identity, and to seek redress for any breaches of their duties as agents.



reframe the 9th principle under Agency Law

Under Agency Law, the 9th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
9. Non-discrimination: An individual has the right to use their digital identity without being subject to discrimination or unequal treatment by agents.



reframe the 8th principle under Agency Law

Under Agency Law, the 8th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
8. Inclusivity: An individual has the right to access services and transactions, regardless of their location, language, or socio-economic status, and without being denied access by agents.



reframe the 7th principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 7th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
7. Interoperability: An individual has the right to use their digital identity in a way that is compatible with other systems and standards, and without being blocked or restricted by agents.



reframe the 6 principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 6th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
6. Portability: An individual has the right to use their digital identity across multiple platforms and services, without being tied to a specific provider or system, and without being denied access by agents.



reframe the 5th principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 5th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
5. Privacy: An individual has the right to have their personal information kept private, and to control how it is shared with agents.



reframe the 4th principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 4th principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
4. Security: An individual has the right to have their digital identity protected from unauthorized access or use by agents.



reframe the 3rd principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 3rd principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
3. Transparency: An individual has the right to know how their digital identity is being used by agents, and to be notified of any changes or updates to it.



reframe the 2nd principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 2nd principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
2. Control: An individual has the right to decide how and when their digital identity is used by agents, and to revoke access to it at any time.



reframe the 1st principle under agency law

Under Agency Law, the 1st principle of self-sovereign identity could be reframed as:
1. Ownership: An individual has the right to own and control their own digital identity, and to hold agents accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's identity.



How might International Law or the Law of the Sea apply to self-sovereign identity?

International Law and the Law of the Sea may apply to self-sovereign identity in several ways.
First, International Law provides a framework for the recognition and protection of individuals' rights, including the right to privacy and the right to control their own personal information. This could be relevant to self-sovereign identity, as individuals may seek to enforce their rights under International Law if their digital identities are accessed or used without their consent.
Second, the Law of the Sea sets out rules and principles for the governance of maritime activities, including the use of digital technologies in the maritime domain. This could be relevant to self-sovereign identity, as individuals may use their digital identities to access services and transactions related to the maritime industry, such as shipping or cargo tracking.
Overall, International Law and the Law of the Sea may provide legal protections and guidance for individuals who use self-sovereign identity in international or maritime contexts. These legal frameworks could help to ensure that individuals' rights and interests are respected, and that their digital identities are used in a responsible and ethical manner.



What are the duties of agents under the law of custom, and how do they apply to self-sovereign identity?

The duties of agents under the law of custom are not well-defined, as customs and traditions vary widely across different cultures and communities. However, some common duties that agents may be expected to fulfill under the law of custom include:
1. Loyalty: Agents are expected to act in the best interests of their principal, and to avoid conflicts of interest that could harm the principal's interests.
2. Care: Agents are expected to act with reasonable care and skill when carrying out their duties on behalf of the principal.
3. Obedience: Agents are expected to follow the instructions and policies of the principal, and to not take any actions that would be contrary to the principal's wishes.
4. Confidentiality: Agents are expected to keep any confidential information they receive from the principal private, and to not disclose it to third parties without the principal's consent.
These duties may apply to self-sovereign identity in similar ways to the law of agency. For example, when an individual shares their self-sovereign identity with an agent (such as a service provider), the agent may be expected to act in the individual's best interests and to protect their personal information. This may include using the individual's identity in a way that is consistent with the individual's instructions and preferences, and not using it for any unauthorized purposes.
Additionally, the duty of care may require the agent to take reasonable steps to protect the individual's identity and personal information from unauthorized access or use. This could include implementing security measures to prevent identity theft or fraud, and ensuring that the individual's information is not shared with unauthorized parties.
Overall, the duties of agents under the law of custom may help to protect the individual's control over their self-sovereign identity, and to hold agents accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's personal information. However, the exact nature and scope of these duties will depend on the customs and traditions of the specific community or culture in which the self-sovereign identity is being used.



apply the law of agency and law of custom to the 10 principles of self-sovereign identity

The law of agency and the law of custom could be applied to the 10 principles of self-sovereign identity in the following ways:

1. Ownership: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to own and control their own digital identity. This means that the individual has the power to decide who has access to their identity, and to hold agents accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's identity.
2. Control: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to decide how and when their digital identity is used, and to revoke access to it at any time. This means that the individual has the power to determine who can use their identity, and to change or withdraw their consent if necessary.
3. Transparency: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to know how their digital identity is being used, and to be notified of any changes or updates to it. This means that the individual has the power to request information about how their identity is being used, and to be informed of any changes that may affect their rights or interests.
4. Security: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to have their digital identity protected from unauthorized access or use. This means that the individual has the power to demand that agents take reasonable steps to protect their identity from theft or fraud, and to hold agents accountable if their identity is accessed or used without their consent.
5. Privacy: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to have their personal information kept private, and to control how it is shared with others. This means that the individual has the power to decide who can access their personal information, and to demand that agents respect their privacy and confidentiality.
6. Portability: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to use their digital identity across multiple platforms and services, without being tied to a specific provider or system. This means that the individual has the power to use their identity in a way that is convenient and flexible, and to demand that agents allow them to access their services without undue restrictions.
7. Interoperability: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to use their digital identity in a way that is compatible with other systems and standards. This means that the individual has the power to demand that agents support their ability to use their identity in a way that is consistent with industry standards and practices.
8. Inclusivity: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to access services and transactions, regardless of their location, language, or socio-economic status. This means that the individual has the power to demand that agents provide them with equal access to services and transactions, and to not discriminate against them on the basis of their identity or background.
9. Non-discrimination: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to use their digital identity without being subject to discrimination or unequal treatment. This means that the individual has the power to demand that agents treat them fairly and equally, and to not discriminate against them on the basis of their identity or characteristics.
10. Accountability: Under both the law of agency and the law of custom, an individual has the right to hold others accountable for their actions with respect to the individual's digital identity, and to seek redress for any violations of their rights. This means that the individual has the power to demand that agents take responsibility for their actions, and to hold them accountable

The principles of self-sovereignty can be applied to Ostrom's commons by recognizing and respecting the individual rights and autonomy of the members of the commons.

This means allowing each member to make their own decisions and choices regarding their use and management of the commons, as long as they do not infringe on the rights and autonomy of others.

Additionally, the principles of self-sovereignty can be applied by empowering the members of the commons to collectively make decisions and rules for the management of the commons, through democratic processes and consensus-based decision making. This allows the members to have a say in the governance and management of the commons, ensuring that it is equitable and sustainable for all.
Furthermore, the principles of self-sovereignty can be applied by recognizing and respecting the rights and autonomy of the commons itself, as a distinct entity with its own needs and interests. This means recognizing the importance of the commons and its resources, and ensuring that they are protected and managed in a way that is sustainable and benefits the members and the commons as a whole.
Overall, applying the principles of self-sovereignty to Ostrom's commons means recognizing and respecting the individual and collective rights and autonomy of the members, and empowering them to make decisions and rules for the management of the commons in an equitable and sustainable manner.