mirror of
https://github.com/Decentralized-ID/decentralized-id.github.io.git
synced 2024-06-26 14:12:13 +00:00
cleanup
This commit is contained in:
⧉ infominer
parent
01d8487f82
commit
53c8b80563
40
_posts/blockchain/2019-04-11-blockchain-identity.md
Normal file
40
_posts/blockchain/2019-04-11-blockchain-identity.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
date: 2019-04-11
|
||||
title: Blockchain Identity
|
||||
description: "Why Blockchain for Identity? + Assorted Blockchain ID Initiatives"
|
||||
excerpt: "Traditional identity systems typically suffer from single points of failure, lack of interoperability, and privacy issues such as encouraging mass data collection and user tracking. Blockchain technology has the potential to support novel data ownership and governance models with built-in control and consent mechanisms, which may benefit both users and businesses by alleviating these concerns; as a result, blockchain-based IDMSs are beginning to proliferate."
|
||||
header:
|
||||
image: /images/blockchain-id-header.webp
|
||||
caption: "[NIST Cybersecurity (DRAFT) Blockchain Identity Management Approaches](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.00929.pdf)"
|
||||
teaser: /images/blockchain-Tumisu_3019121.webp
|
||||
layout: single
|
||||
permalink: /blockchain/
|
||||
categories: [Blockchain ID]
|
||||
tags: ["NIST","Identiverse",Authenteq,Blockstack,Civic,Microsoft,Datum,ProCivis]
|
||||
last_modified_at: 2023-06-09
|
||||
toc: false
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
* [curated list] [Peacekeeper's Blockchain and Identity](https://github.com/peacekeeper/blockchain-identity) 2021-11-23
|
||||
* [NIST CYBERSECURITY WHITE PAPER] [**_A Taxonomic Approach to Understanding Emerging Blockchain Identity Management Systems_**](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.00929.pdf) 2019-06-09
|
||||
> Identity management systems (IDMSs) are widely used to provision user identities while managing authentication, authorization, and data sharing both within organizations as well as on the Internet more broadly. Traditional identity systems typically suffer from single points of failure, lack of interoperability, and privacy issues such as encouraging mass data collection and user tracking. Blockchain technology has the potential to support novel data ownership and governance models with built-in control and consent mechanisms, which may benefit both users and businesses by alleviating these concerns; as a result, blockchain-based IDMSs are beginning to proliferate. This work categorizes these systems into a taxonomy based on differences in architecture, governance models, and other salient features. We provide context for the taxonomy by describing related terms, emerging standards, and use cases, while highlighting relevant security and privacy considerations.
|
||||
* [Identity and Distributed Ledger - Today and Tomorrow - June 26 - Identiverse 2019](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l04AHP7kPPw) 2019-06-26
|
||||
> Join our expert panel, moderated by Paul Madsen, as they discuss and debate the future of distributed identity technology and its applications in solving identity problems.
|
||||
* [Phil Windley (@windley)](https://twitter.com/windley/status/1071469217650638848) 2018-12-09
|
||||
> If ledger isn’t used, then every issuer of a credential has to maintain infrastructure or contract service provider to respond to DID resolution & revocation requests. And, credential issuers would know when the credential was used, impacting privacy.
|
||||
* [Part 3: Blockchange and Identity – The Foundational Use Case](https://blockchan.ge/fieldreport/identity.html) GovLab 2018-11-01
|
||||
> The contemporary IAM literature focuses on two central types of identity. The first is foundational identity, which is usually equated with legal identity. Here, after collecting attributes, individuals are issued a unique ID that is legally recognized at the national level and can be used to access different services. Legal IDs are almost always issued by the state in a centralized fashion. National ID cards are perhaps the best example of a foundational identity.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> The second type is called functional or transactional ID. In this case, a particular entity, public or private, issues individuals or customers a unique ID that is only valid for the specific purposes previously established by the issuing entity. Electoral identities, health or car insurance cards, and ecommerce login credentials are good examples.
|
||||
* [Blockchain Identity – Success Factors and Challenges](https://www.kuppingercole.com/blog/kuppinger/blockchain-identity-success-factors-and-challenges) 2018-05-16 Martin Kuppinger
|
||||
> When new things arrive, which are still in the pioneering stage and far from reaching maturity, there is always a lot of discussion. This is even more true for Blockchain Identity, where the massive hype around Blockchains, a long history of clever ideas failing, and a few interesting technical and security challenges come together. During my keynote at this year’s EIC, I addressed the challenges and success factors for Blockchain ID as well. That led to a discussion on Twitter about whether some of these success factors are contradictory.
|
||||
|
||||
* [Blockchain-Anchored Identity – A Gateway to Decentralized Apps and Services](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUYpvI43bHA) 2017-05-10 Daniel Buchner
|
||||
> Blockchains possess unique properties that can be used to build systems that significantly impact our world. Perhaps no area of utilization, besides raw value exchange, is as intriguing as decentralized identity. In this talk we will discuss how blockchain-anchored decentralized identity can be used as a substrate for secure, user-centric apps and services.
|
||||
* [Towards Self-Sovereign Identity using Blockchain Technology](https://essay.utwente.nl/71274/1/Baars_MA_BMS.pdf) 2016-10-26
|
||||
> Blockchain technology could function as the foundation of such system being a network for decentralized trust and exchange. Because everyone can participate as issuer or acquirer (and both), there are low adoption barriers and low costs. This allows new business opportunities for governments, banks and other authorities and more transparency and control for end-users.
|
||||
* [Self-Sovereign Identity and the Legitimacy of Permissioned Ledgers](http://www.windley.com/archives/2016/09/self-sovereign_identity_and_the_legitimacy_of_permissioned_ledgers.shtml) 2016-09
|
||||
> This post justifies the claim that an identity system based on a permissioned distributed ledger is legitimately self-sovereign. The post also examines the claims to legitimacy that social login and distributed ledger identity systems make.
|
||||
* [Blockchain for Identity - Myth or Potential](https://www.kuppingercole.com/blog/kuppinger/blockchain-for-identity-myth-or-potential) 2018-06-16
|
||||
> Authentication might definitely become simpler, by having various authenticators and IDs, from eIDs to social logins, associated with a wallet. Just one simple store to get access. Yes, there are challenges in creating secure, easy-to-use wallets, but there is potential as well.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -17,67 +17,45 @@ header:
|
|||
caption: "[On the Emergent Use of Distributed Ledger Technologies for Identity Management](https://blockchan.ge/blockchange-fieldreport.pdf)"
|
||||
categories: ["Government"]
|
||||
tags: ["USA","Canada","Europe","GDPR","ProCivis","California","CCPA","Humanitarian"]
|
||||
last_modified_at: 2019-01-11
|
||||
last_modified_at: 2023-07-10
|
||||
toc: false
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### [European Government Identity Initiatives]({% link _posts/government/europe/2020-01-11-europe.md %})
|
||||
|
||||
#### [Decentralized Identity and the United States Public Sector]({% link _posts/government/usa/2020-01-11-usa.md %})
|
||||
|
||||
## Blockchain and Digital ID
|
||||
|
||||
[Blockchain for digital government](https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/document/2019-04/JRC115049%20blockchain%20for%20digital%20government.pdf)
|
||||
> This report looks at the ongoing exploration of blockchain technology by governments. The analysis of a group of pioneering developments of public services shows that blockchain technology can reduce bureaucracy, increase the efficiency of administrative processes and increase the level of trust in public recordkeeping. Based on the state-ofart developments, blockchain has not yet demonstrated to be either transformative or even disruptive innovation for governments as it is sometimes portrayed. Ongoing projects bring incremental rather than fundamental changes to the operational capacities of governments. Nevertheless some of them propose clear value for citizens.
|
||||
|
||||
[News Flash: Malaysia’s Pushes Ahead With Digital ID](https://www.gsma.com/identity/malaysias-pushes-ahead-with-digital-id)
|
||||
[Part 3: Blockchange and Identity – The Foundational Use Case](https://blockchan.ge/fieldreport/identity.html)
|
||||
> The contemporary IAM literature focuses on two central types of identity.80 The first is foundational identity, which is usually equated with legal identity. Here, after collecting attributes, individuals are issued a unique ID that is legally recognized at the national level and can be used to access different services.81 Legal IDs are almost always issued by the state in a centralized fashion. National ID cards are perhaps the best example of a foundational identity.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> The second type is called functional or transactional ID. In this case, a particular entity, public or private, issues individuals or customers a unique ID that is only valid for the specific purposes previously established by the issuing entity. Electoral identities, health or car insurance cards, and ecommerce login credentials are good examples.
|
||||
* [Identity Validation as a Public Sector Digital Service?](https://blog.aniljohn.com/2014/07/identity-validation-as-a-public-sector-digital-service.html)
|
||||
* [Decentralized Identity For Government](https://www.evernym.com/government/) - Create trusted digital relationships between citizens and government services.
|
||||
> With a surge of new regulations, including GDPR and KYC, governments have been the catalysts for redefining how organizations handle issues of trust and privacy. Over the last several years, we’ve seen pioneers emerge from local and federal governments alike, and we’ve created our Early-Access Packages as a way to help them leverage decentralized capabilities to unlock economic growth and enable new citizen relationships.
|
||||
|
||||
{% include video id="qlQNahzjJVw" provider="youtube" %}
|
||||
|
||||
[Governments and Decentralized Identity -- Presentation from Shailee Adinolfi](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlQNahzjJVw)
|
||||
> Shailee Adinolfi (Director, Government Blockchain Solutions, ConsenSys) argues that government adoption of self-sovereign identity is necessary for any widespread implementation of the technology. Through use of blockchain, SSI could provide oversight, transparency, and security while smart contracts could automate government processes, reducing costs and improving efficiency.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
[Identity and Electronic/Digital Government Melanie Tjijenda](http://www.id4africa.com/2019_event/presentations/InF9/InF9-3-Melanie-Tjijenda-Namibia-Final.pdf) - Republic of Namibia
|
||||
> The African Union provides the following as recommendations to help protect identity Privacy:
|
||||
> § Develop a consistent approach to personal data protection Policy and Law
|
||||
> § Review laws, procedures and practices, including those related to communications surveillance or interception.
|
||||
> § Member states should establish an independent Data Protection Authorities (DPA) to ensure their national privacy and personal data protection laws are being observed.
|
||||
> § Establish regulatory authorities that will enforcement measures
|
||||
|
||||
[Digital Identity: Towards Shared Principles for Public and Private Sector Cooperation](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/600821469220400272/pdf/107201-WP-PUBLIC-WB-GSMA-SIADigitalIdentity-WEB.pdf) - A joint World Bank Group – GSMA – Secure Identity Alliance Discussion Paper
|
||||
> The ability to prove one’s identity is increasingly recognized as the basis for participation in social, political, economic, and cultural life. Yet at least a billion people in developing countries lack any form of officially recognized ID. This problem disproportionally impacts rural residents, poor people, women, children, and other vulnerable groups in Africa and Asia. Digital identity, combined with the extensive use of mobile devices in the developing world, offers a transformative solution to this global challenge and provides public and private sector entities with efficient ways to reach the poorest and most disadvantaged. This discussion paper, divided into three parts, explores the connection between digital identity and sustainable development. Part I illustrates how the use of digital identity promotes efficiency gains, financial savings, social inclusion and access to basic services and rights, with examples from countries that have adopted digital identity systems. The paper then outlines some of the key risks and challenges that must be overcome, specifically in the areas of political commitment, data protection and privacy, cost, and sustainable business models. Part II of the paper lays out the digital identity lifecycle and the roles of public and private sector players, and suggests some key considerations in the design of business models. Finally, Part III of the paper suggests some common principles—including universal coverage, appropriate and effective design, and privacy and data protection—and enablers for maximizing the potential of digital identity to contribute to sustainable development.
|
||||
|
||||
[Private-Sector Digital Identity in Emerging Markets](https://www.cariboudigital.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Caribou-Digitial-Omidyar-Network-Private-Sector-Digital-Identity-In-Emerging-Markets.pdf)
|
||||
> Digitization in the public sector is moving much more slowly, but the transition away from analog is well underway. Smart identity cards, NFC-enabled passports, and digitally stored biometrics are being used by states around the world as they upgrade legacy identity systems. The benefits of digitization for governments— increased efficiencies, lower costs, reduced fraud and corruption, easier surveillance, better data sharing within government—are clear and significant. And for those countries who haven’t yet been able to establish a highly successful analog identity program, the potential of leapfrogging to a fully digital infrastructure is very appealing. Most importantly, the advantages of digital systems have the potential to expand access to identity for otherwise marginalized and vulnerable populations. The benefits of a legal identity for these groups can be tremendous, and the U.N. formally recognized these advantages in 2015 by codifying them into Sustainable Development Goal 16.9: “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.”
|
||||
|
||||
[A Decentralized Digital Identity Architecture](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbloc.2019.00017/full)
|
||||
> Although this article shall focus on challenges related to identity systems for adult persons in the developed world, we argue that the considerations around data protection and personal data that are applicable in the humanitarian context, such as those elaborated by the International Committee of the Red Cross (Kuner and Marelli, 2017; Stevens et al., 2018), also apply to the general case. We specifically consider the increasingly commonplace application of identity systems “to facilitate targeting, profiling and surveillance” by “binding us to our recorded characteristics and behaviors” (Privacy International, 2019). Although we focus primarily upon the application of systems for digital credentials to citizens of relatively wealthy societies, we hope that our proposed architecture might contribute to the identity zeitgeist in contexts such as humanitarian aid, disaster relief, refugee migration, and the special interests of children as well.
|
||||
|
||||
## Procivis
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
[procivis.ch](https://procivis.ch/) — "e-government as a service" platform called "eID+". It enables citizens to get an official, electronic Citizen-ID on a mobile app. [https://vetri.global/](https://vetri.global/)
|
||||
|
||||
[The ‘Digital Identity Crisis’ and what it means for Governments and individuals](https://procivis.ch/2019/11/18/the-digital-identity-crisis-and-what-it-means-for-governments-and-individuals/)
|
||||
* [Decentralized Identity & Government](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8pHUdjKfes) Evernym 2021-12-08
|
||||
> The key differences between federated and decentralized identity systems - An analysis of a few notable government-led projects, such as Aadhaar (India), Verify (UK), eIDAS (EU), and the Ontario Digital Identity Program (Canada) - What decentralization means for portability, scalability, flexibility, and privacy - How governments and commercial organizations can enhance existing federated identity systems with verifiable credentials
|
||||
* [Digital Identity Around the World: Why Some Countries are Embracing Self Sovereign Identity Quicker](https://hackernoon.com/digital-identity-around-the-world-why-some-countries-are-embracing-self-sovereign-identity-quicker) 2021-09-03 Hackernoon
|
||||
> Each government moves at its own pace for as many reasons as there are countries, and digital identity/SSI will only become a reality once governments voice their support, regulations, and standards are adopted, infrastructure is created or upgraded, and interoperability, inclusion, and education are all addressed.
|
||||
* [Navigating Digital Identity in Political Economies RxC Panel](https://identitywoman.net/navigating-digital-identity-in-political-economies-rxc-talk/) 2021-08-25 IdentityWoman.net
|
||||
> Most digital identity systems are centralized (e.g., in big government or technology organizations) or individualistic (e.g., in most blockchain projects). However, being in the world is fundamentally social and intersectional — we are all part of networks. So how might we formalize digital identity in a way that better reflects this complex reality? This panel with leading social technology and computer researchers explores more robust digital identity approaches and potential application areas in political economies.
|
||||
* [The Policymaker’s Guide to Respectful Technology in Legislation](https://me2ba.org/the-policymakers-guide-to-respectful-technology-in-legislation/) 2021-05-14 Me2BA
|
||||
> What most people want but don’t have the terms to describe is respectful digital relationships. In the same way there is an unspoken code for respectful behavior in physical-realm relationships, this same type of behavior is just as essential when engaging with an online service or website.
|
||||
* [Verifiable Credentials: Mapping to a Generic Policy Terminology](https://trbouma.medium.com/verifiable-credentials-mapping-to-a-generic-policy-terminology-bce84a039bb) 2021-03-26
|
||||
> Why is this useful? When writing policy, you need a succinct model which is clear enough for subsequent interpretation. To do this, you need conceptual buckets to drop things into. Yes, this model is likely to change, but it’s my best and latest crack at it to synthesize the complex world of digital credentials with an abstraction that might be useful to help us align existing solutions while adopting exciting new capabilities.
|
||||
* [Self-Sovereign Identity and Government – Data Exchange](https://cyber.ee/resources/case-studies/self-sovereign-identity-and-government-identity/) 2021-03-23 Cybernetica
|
||||
> This is often achieved with ID cards or passports that we have in our possession with a photo to prove that we are the person this card belongs to, and therefore the person that ID number refers to. In digital identity terms, PKI takes the place of ID cards and offers public and private key pairs.
|
||||
* [Data: Governance and Geopolitics](https://www.mydigitalfootprint.com/2021/01/data-governance-and-geopolitics.html) 2021-01-16 Tony Fish
|
||||
> How data is governed can be thought of along several lines of activity: legislating privacy and data use, regulating content, using antitrust laws to dilute data monopolies, self-regulating by the tech giants, regulating digital trade, addressing intellectual property rights (IPR) infringement, assuring cybersecurity, and practicing cyber diplomacy. Of these, antitrust, regulation, and privacy are most immediately in the spotlight, and are the focus of this commentary, but it will also touch briefly on the connections with other issues.
|
||||
* [It’s time for governments to get serious about digital identities](https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/risk/articles/solving-the-public-sector-identity-crisis.html?id=global:2sm:3tw:4dcom_share:5awa:6dcom:risk) 2020-02-25 Deloitte
|
||||
> While the tools may already exist to solve the government’s identity crisis, real progress will only be made if governments significantly evolve their legacy approaches to digital identity.
|
||||
* [The ‘Digital Identity Crisis’ and what it means for Governments and individuals](https://procivis.ch/2019/11/18/the-digital-identity-crisis-and-what-it-means-for-governments-and-individuals/) 2019-11-18 ProCivis
|
||||
> In my thesis, I explored the potential use of Blockchain technology and the features it offers within digital identity management to understand whether there is a case for using this technology based on an improvement in public sector efficiency and perceived trust. The thesis also aimed at understanding the key motivations for the public sector to build an ecosystem or infrastructure for blockchain based digital identity vs. their existing systems (or lack thereof). Thus, the viewpoint of state actors, along with a perception of citizens towards current systems and future acceptability of developing solutions was also considered.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Regulation
|
||||
|
||||
[Self Sovereign Identity & Decentralized Identity: Control Your Data](https://dragonchain.com/blog/decentralized-identity-self-sovereign-identity-explained/#toc_15). Provides outline of some global regulations related to identity and privacy, as part of a high level SSI primer, breifly discussing:
|
||||
* [Self Sovereign Identity & Decentralized Identity: Control Your Data](https://dragonchain.com/blog/decentralized-identity-self-sovereign-identity-explained/#toc_15) 2019-08-27 DragonChain
|
||||
* Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
|
||||
* The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)
|
||||
* European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
|
||||
* Singapore Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (PDPA)
|
||||
* Japan's Act on Protection of Personal Information (APPI)
|
||||
* Data breach notification laws
|
||||
|
||||
* [Decentralized Identity For Government](https://www.evernym.com/government/) 2019-07-01
|
||||
> Create trusted digital relationships between citizens and government services.
|
||||
> With a surge of new regulations, including GDPR and KYC, governments have been the catalysts for redefining how organizations handle issues of trust and privacy. Over the last several years, we’ve seen pioneers emerge from local and federal governments alike, and we’ve created our Early-Access Packages as a way to help them leverage decentralized capabilities to unlock economic growth and enable new citizen relationships.
|
||||
* [Blockchain for digital government](https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/document/2019-04/JRC115049%20blockchain%20for%20digital%20government.pdf) 2019-04
|
||||
> This report looks at the ongoing exploration of blockchain technology by governments. The analysis of a group of pioneering developments of public services shows that blockchain technology can reduce bureaucracy, increase the efficiency of administrative processes and increase the level of trust in public recordkeeping. Based on the state-ofart developments, blockchain has not yet demonstrated to be either transformative or even disruptive innovation for governments as it is sometimes portrayed. Ongoing projects bring incremental rather than fundamental changes to the operational capacities of governments. Nevertheless some of them propose clear value for citizens.
|
||||
* [Private-Sector Digital Identity in Emerging Markets](https://www.cariboudigital.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Caribou-Digitial-Omidyar-Network-Private-Sector-Digital-Identity-In-Emerging-Markets.pdf) 2019-01 Caribou Digital
|
||||
> Digitization in the public sector is moving much more slowly, but the transition away from analog is well underway. Smart identity cards, NFC-enabled passports, and digitally stored biometrics are being used by states around the world as they upgrade legacy identity systems. The benefits of digitization for governments— increased efficiencies, lower costs, reduced fraud and corruption, easier surveillance, better data sharing within government—are clear and significant. And for those countries who haven’t yet been able to establish a highly successful analog identity program, the potential of leapfrogging to a fully digital infrastructure is very appealing. Most importantly, the advantages of digital systems have the potential to expand access to identity for otherwise marginalized and vulnerable populations. The benefits of a legal identity for these groups can be tremendous, and the U.N. formally recognized these advantages in 2015 by codifying them into Sustainable Development Goal 16.9: “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.”
|
||||
* [Governments and Decentralized Identity -- Presentation from Shailee Adinolfi](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlQNahzjJVw) 2018-12-06
|
||||
> Shailee Adinolfi (Director, Government Blockchain Solutions, ConsenSys) argues that government adoption of self-sovereign identity is necessary for any widespread implementation of the technology. Through use of blockchain, SSI could provide oversight, transparency, and security while smart contracts could automate government processes, reducing costs and improving efficiency.
|
||||
* [Digital Identity: Towards Shared Principles for Public and Private Sector Cooperation](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/600821469220400272/pdf/107201-WP-PUBLIC-WB-GSMA-SIADigitalIdentity-WEB.pdf) 2016-07 World Bank Group, GSMA, Secure Identity Alliance
|
||||
> The ability to prove one’s identity is increasingly recognized as the basis for participation in social, political, economic, and cultural life. Yet at least a billion people in developing countries lack any form of officially recognized ID. This problem disproportionally impacts rural residents, poor people, women, children, and other vulnerable groups in Africa and Asia. Digital identity, combined with the extensive use of mobile devices in the developing world, offers a transformative solution to this global challenge and provides public and private sector entities with efficient ways to reach the poorest and most disadvantaged. This discussion paper, divided into three parts, explores the connection between digital identity and sustainable development. Part I illustrates how the use of digital identity promotes efficiency gains, financial savings, social inclusion and access to basic services and rights, with examples from countries that have adopted digital identity systems. The paper then outlines some of the key risks and challenges that must be overcome, specifically in the areas of political commitment, data protection and privacy, cost, and sustainable business models. Part II of the paper lays out the digital identity lifecycle and the roles of public and private sector players, and suggests some key considerations in the design of business models. Finally, Part III of the paper suggests some common principles—including universal coverage, appropriate and effective design, and privacy and data protection—and enablers for maximizing the potential of digital identity to contribute to sustainable development.
|
||||
* [Identity Validation as a Public Sector Digital Service?](https://blog.aniljohn.com/2014/07/identity-validation-as-a-public-sector-digital-service.html) 2014-07
|
||||
> I’ve written before about the role that the public sector currently has in identity establishment, but not in identity validation. This absence has led to an online ecosystem in the U.S. that depends on non-authoritative information for identity validation. These are some initial thoughts on what an attribute validation service, which provides validation of identity attributes using authoritative public sector sources, could look like.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user