mirror of
https://github.com/Decentralized-ID/decentralized-id.github.io.git
synced 2024-07-08 20:01:53 +00:00
tags and categories
This commit is contained in:
Infominer
parent
911004bef1
commit
f3a7fb014e
|
|
@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ permalink: media/
|
|||
canonical_url: 'https://decentralized-id.com/media/'
|
||||
redirect_from: media
|
||||
categories: ["Multi-Media"]
|
||||
tags: ["Specs Standards","Slideshares","Podcasts","uPort","MyData"]
|
||||
tags: ["Specs Standards","uPort","MyData"]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,14 +6,12 @@ canonical_url: 'https://decentralized-id.com/private-sector/danube-tech/'
|
|||
redirect_from:
|
||||
- id-initiatives/danube
|
||||
- id-initiatives/danube/
|
||||
categories: ["Private-sector","Literature"]
|
||||
categories: ["Private-sector","Blockchain"]
|
||||
tags: ["Danube","XDI"]
|
||||
toc_sticky: false
|
||||
last_modified_at: 2019-07-11T11:22:33-23:00
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- split out danube literature into it's own file... so every firm and organization will have a main page, a page for their github repos\code, and a page for literature-->
|
||||
|
||||
Danube Tech must be the longest running firm working towards user-owned and controlled internet identity.
|
||||
|
||||
* [Danube Tech](http://danubetech.com/) — digital identity and personal data, including personal agents, semantic graphs, and blockchain ([**xdi**](https://xdi2.org)) ([**navigator**](https://github.com/projectdanube/xdi2)) - [Markus Sabadello (Peacekeeper)](http://mydata2016.org/speaker/markus-sabadello/) [[**T**](https://twitter.com/peacekeeper)] [[**G**](https://github.com/peacekeeper)] [[**B**](https://medium.com/@markus.sabadello)] has been working on XDI personal data stores since as early as 2010.
|
||||
|
|
@ -139,14 +137,72 @@ A configuration profile of the XDI2 server for hosting a registry of XDI names a
|
|||
|
||||
## [Publications](https://danubetech.com/download.html)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2010
|
||||
### 2019
|
||||
|
||||
* [Potential of ICTs for Peace](https://danubetech.com/download/Potential-of-ICTs-for-Peace.pdf)
|
||||
>Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have greatly transformed societies, cultures and economies as well as created both new opportunities and threats for humankind. The academic field of Peace and Conflict Studies with its inherent character of being based on concrete values rather than striving to always be objective on all accounts is especially suited and challenged to explore how ICTs should be judged and used when it comes to working toward an ideal – the ideal of peace. This paper provides a short motivation for working in this area as well a summary of work that has already been done, then moves on to giving a quick overview over ICTs and especially the Internet as an electronic medium, and finally explores several concrete ways in which ICTs can be used for peace: As a tool by international organizations, as a weapon in nonviolent struggle, and as a pillar for building and maintaining peaceful societies.
|
||||
* [Potential of ICTs for Conflict](https://danubetech.com/download/Potential-of-ICTs-for-Conflict.pdf)
|
||||
>Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have greatly transformed societies, cultures and economies as well as created both new opportunities and threats for humankind. Since at least Manuel Castells’ widely cited book trilogy “The Information Age”1, we have a good scientific understanding of the causes, nature and consequences of today’s interconnected society that is the result of the spreading of ICTs and the globalization processes accompanying them. And since at least the World Summit on the Information Society2, which culminated in its second phase in 2005 in Tunis, the United Nations as well as a large amount of other stakeholders have been working on evaluating the potential of ICTs for the values of peace and democracy, as well as the risks of conflict and abuse caused by such technologies.
|
||||
* [Comparing terrorist and Internet networks](https://danubetech.com/download/Comparing-terrorist-and-Internet-networks.pdf)
|
||||
>The network, stronger than the node, Can circumvent a failing part, Security and control code keep alive the network’s heart. But what if every spark goes dark, abandons network, node and core, what if they cease to light the night, because the people send no more?
|
||||
* [RWoT#8: Universal DID Operations](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/Universal-DID-Operations.md)
|
||||
>Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) have seen increasing adoption across a wide number of distributed ledger ecosystems and blockchains. This is in large part due to our ability to effectively communicate by resolving these DIDs. The process of obtaining a DID Document associated with a particular DID is outlined in the DID Resolution spec.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>A blockchain-agnostic implementation of the spec is hosted at the Decentralized Identity Foundation and is fully open-sourced. The Universal Resolver can be found at its website and also runs locally or remotely through an API. It currently supports DIDs on Sovrin, BTCR, uPort, Jolocom, Veres One, ERC-725, Blockstack, IPFS, and DNS via a number of community-contributed drivers built on top of the Universal Resolver.
|
||||
* [Markus Sabadello and Infominer33 on Identity Landscape](https://kumu.io/vijarn/markus-sabadello-and-infominer33-on-identity-landscape)
|
||||
>Combination of Markus Sabadello and Infominer33 githubs
|
||||
>
|
||||
>about Self Sovereign Identity and Identity Landscape.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>This may take longer time to load and longer time to response to commands such as showcasing control since there are a lot of elements and codes.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2018
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#6: Introduction to DID Auth](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot6-santabarbara/blob/master/final-documents/did-auth.md)
|
||||
>The term DID Auth has been used in different ways and is currently not well-defined. We define DID Auth as a ceremony where an identity owner, with the help of various components such as web browsers, mobile devices, and other agents, proves to a relying party that they are in control of a DID. This means demonstrating control of the DID using the mechanism specified in the DID Document's "authentication" object. This could take place using a number of different data formats, protocols, and flows. DID Auth includes the ability to establish mutually authenticated communication channels and to authenticate to web sites and applications. Authorization, Verifiable Credentials, and Capabilities are built on top of DID Auth and are out of scope for this document. This paper gives on overview of the scope of DID Auth, supported protocols and flows, and the use of components of the DID Documents that are relevant to authentication, as well as formats for challenges and responses.
|
||||
* [RWoT#6: did:erc725 method](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot6-santabarbara/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/DID-Method-erc725.md)
|
||||
>Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs, see [1]) are designed to be compatible with any distributed ledger or network (called the target system). In the Ethereum community, a pattern known as ERC725 (see [2]) utilizes smart contracts for standard key management functions. We propose a new DID method that allows ERC725 identities to be treated as valid DIDs. One advantage of this DID method over others appears to be the ability to use the full flexibility of Ethereum smart contracts for key management purposes.
|
||||
* [RWoT#7: DID Resolution Topics](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot7-toronto/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/did-resolution-topics.md)
|
||||
>We know that DID Resolution is the process of obtaining the DID Document associated with a DID. Sounds simple, but what are some of the deeper questions and topics to be considered here?
|
||||
|
||||
### 2017
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#4: XDI Verifiable Claims and Link Contracts](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot4-paris/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/xdi-verifiable-claims-link-contracts.md)
|
||||
>There is a high level of interest in the Rebooting-the-Web-of-Trust community and beyond in "verifiable claims", i.e. "a cryptographically non-repudiable set of statements made by an entity about another entity" (see [1]). This work foresees that "the next generation of web applications will authorize entities to perform actions based on rich sets of credentials issued by trusted parties" (see [2]).
|
||||
>
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a technology for modeling, storing and sharing personal and organizational identity data. One key component of this technology is the "link contract", i.e. a "data sharing agreement between the publisher of the data, called the authorizing authority, and a party who wants to access the data, called the requesting authority" (see [3]).
|
||||
>
|
||||
>XDI link contracts contain a policy tree which is used to decide if the permissions granted by the link contract can be invoked by a requesting authority. This policy evaluates conditions based on input elements such as the authorizing authority, requesting authority, and an incoming request message. Simple conditions of the policy could e.g. require the presentation of a valid password or signature.
|
||||
* [A Universal Resolver for Self-Sovereign Identifiers](https://medium.com/decentralized-identity/a-universal-resolver-for-self-sovereign-identifiers-48e6b4a5cc3c)
|
||||
>This tool fulfills a similar purpose as Bind does in the DNS system: resolution of identifiers. However, instead of working with domain names, we work with self-sovereign identifiers that can be created and registered directly by the entities they refer to. This is important, because identifiers are the basis for any identity and communications system — without identifiers, we cannot have relationships, transactions, data sharing or messaging between entities. Historically identifiers have always been assigned to us by some kind of corporate or state authority. The Universal Resolver lets us build architectures and protocols on top of identifiers that are completely self-sovereign. There is no longer a need for a central authority to issue, maintain and revoke identifiers.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>However, just having an identifier is not enough. We need some further information in order to know how to communicate with the entity represented by the identifier. The job of a “Resolver” is to discover and retrieve this further information. At a minimum, this information includes elements such as service endpoints for communicating with the entity, as well as the cryptographic keys associated with it. The Universal Resolver performs this task to enable the basic building blocks of a self-sovereign identity world.
|
||||
* [RWoT#5: First XDI Link Contract between "btcr" DID and "sov" DID](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot5-boston/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/first-xdi-link-contract-between-btcr-did-and-sov-did.md)
|
||||
>We describe an XDI link contract established between two XDI peers, one of which is identified by a btcr DID, and one by a sov DID. We believe this is the first working example of cross-DID-method data sharing and messaging.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### 2016
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#2: XDI Graphs in IPFS](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot2-id2020/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/XDI-Graphs-in-IPFS.md)
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a technology for modeling, storing and connecting any kind of personal and organizational data. Its underlying data model is a graph consisting of nodes and directed arcs. XDI is well-suited for digital identity that is distributed and heterogeneous. Through the use of mappings and connectors, XDI can be used to model even data that is not itself natively in XDI format (e.g. a Facebook profile, a government ID, or a record in a corporate database). Traditionally, XDI assumes a network topology that involves service providers and endpoints, e.g. a connection can be established between an individual and an organization through their respective endpoints.
|
||||
* [RWoT#3: JXD Examples](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot3-sf/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/JXD-Examples.md)
|
||||
>JXD is a JSON-based serialization format for the XDI graph model, designed to combine the simplicity of JSON with the semantic richness of XDI.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>An XDI graph can sometimes be serialized to JXD in different ways (some more verbose, some more compact), but deserializing a JXD back to XDI always results in the same original XDI graph. Every XDI graph can be serialized to JXD, and every JXD document can be deserialized to a valid XDI graph.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>An XDI graph is built from XDI context nodes, which form a semantic tree. In JXD, an XDI context node is represented as a JSON object, with an @id JSON object key set to the XDI context node’s address.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2015
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#1: XDI, Blockstore, and BIP32](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot1-sf/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/cool-hack-xdi-blockstore-bip32.md)
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a semantic graph technology for modeling, accessing, and linking any data online. It is similar to RDF insofar as it is also based on triples describing a graph of nodes that represent resources (called "contexts" in XDI), properties that connect resources (called "relations" in XDI), and literals. Unlike RDF which uses opaque URIs (mostly HTTP) as identifiers and which constructs all semantics purely from the graph structure, XDI identifiers use an abstract syntax where semantics are established not only from graph structure, but also from the identifiers themselves. For example, in RDF an identifier for a person may be http://danubetech.com#markus, whereas in XDI, an identifier for a person would be =markus. XDI often assigns two or more identifiers to a resource, e.g. while =markus is considered a "reassignable XDI name", a corresponding "permanent XDI number" such as =!:uuid:91f28153-f600-ae24-91f2-8153f600ae24 may also be assigned. Simply by parsing the identifiers, some limited semantics can already be extracted ("=" stands for person, "!" stands for permanent).
|
||||
* [Decentralized Public Key Infrastructure](https://danubetech.com/download/dpki.pdf)
|
||||
>Today’s Internet places control of online identities into the hands of third-parties. Email addresses, usernames, and website domains are borrowed or "rented" through DNS, X.509, and social networks. This results in severe usability and security challenges Internet-wide. This paper describes a possible alternate approach called decentralized public key infrastructure (DPKI), which returns control of online identities to the entities they belong to. By doing so, DPKI addresses many usability and security challenges that plague traditional public key infrastructure (PKI). DPKI has advantages at each stage of the PKI life cycle. It makes permissionless bootstrapping of online identities possible and provides for the simple creation of stronger SSL certificates. In usage, it can help “Johnny” to finally encrypt thanks to its relegation of public key management to secure decentralized datastores. Finally, it includes mechanisms to recover lost or compromised identifiers.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2012
|
||||
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Decentralized Architectures](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Decentralized-Architectures.pdf)
|
||||
>One of the most fundamental challenges for the PDE to consider will be the design and deployment of suitable underlying architectures for realizing emerging visions around the management and use of personal data. The basic organizational structures, according to which participants of an ecosystem exchange information with each other, influence many of its fundamental properties, such as privacy, security, flexibility, discovery, or the dependencies between different actors. The possible types of architectural patterns that can be implemented are highly diverse, with centralized structures on one end of the spectrum, and fully distributed systems on the other end. On the Internet, very different forms have always existed, depending on the infrastructural layer and the concrete applications and services one looks at.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Understanding OAuth](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-OAuth.pdf)
|
||||
>Selecting the OAuth (“Open Authorization”) protocol as the topic for the second feature article of our Personal Data Journal is a logical choice for two reasons. Firstly, the vision of establishing an ecosystem around personal data is intrinsically linked to the topics of authorization and access control. Whether we are talking about giving individuals more privacy and more control over their personal data, or whether we are exploring new economic models to be built around it, the question of who can access what under which permissions and obligations is central to achieving them.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Privacy By Design](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Privacy-By-Design.pdf)
|
||||
>The idea of an emerging Personal Data Ecosystem (PDE) is based on several different lines of thought. Ultimately the purpose of the PDE is to help us all make sense of the unprecedented amount of online personal data we observe today. It is about creating new business models and economic opportunities based on this personal data, which has been called a new currency, or asset. It will give individuals the means to control how this asset is used. In doing so, an awareness of the importance of privacy will develop on one hand and on the other privacy by design will become one of the key principles of the concrete solutions that ecosystem members are developing. In this article, we will offer a quick introduction to privacy and then move on to describe concrete resources and approaches to Privacy-By-Design, which is the idea of “baking in” privacy up front into the design of software architectures, rather than considering it a secondary or 3rd-party aspect of classic software engineering or deployment.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Startup Technology Report](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Tech-Research-Phase-One-Report.pdf)
|
||||
>The Internet Society thorough our Trust and Identity Initiatives have followed with great interest the work of the user-centric developers and deployers within the Identity EcoSystem. The recent work on Personal Data offers a number of interesting choices for individual users and we are pleased to support this initial survey of some of the leading solutions currently under way. It is our hope this information will encourage additional dialogue within the community and will lead to greater interoperability and better engagement with end-users.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2011
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -177,72 +233,11 @@ A configuration profile of the XDI2 server for hosting a registry of XDI names a
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### 2010
|
||||
|
||||
### 2012
|
||||
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Decentralized Architectures](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Decentralized-Architectures.pdf)
|
||||
>One of the most fundamental challenges for the PDE to consider will be the design and deployment of suitable underlying architectures for realizing emerging visions around the management and use of personal data. The basic organizational structures, according to which participants of an ecosystem exchange information with each other, influence many of its fundamental properties, such as privacy, security, flexibility, discovery, or the dependencies between different actors. The possible types of architectural patterns that can be implemented are highly diverse, with centralized structures on one end of the spectrum, and fully distributed systems on the other end. On the Internet, very different forms have always existed, depending on the infrastructural layer and the concrete applications and services one looks at.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Understanding OAuth](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-OAuth.pdf)
|
||||
>Selecting the OAuth (“Open Authorization”) protocol as the topic for the second feature article of our Personal Data Journal is a logical choice for two reasons. Firstly, the vision of establishing an ecosystem around personal data is intrinsically linked to the topics of authorization and access control. Whether we are talking about giving individuals more privacy and more control over their personal data, or whether we are exploring new economic models to be built around it, the question of who can access what under which permissions and obligations is central to achieving them.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Privacy By Design](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Privacy-By-Design.pdf)
|
||||
>The idea of an emerging Personal Data Ecosystem (PDE) is based on several different lines of thought. Ultimately the purpose of the PDE is to help us all make sense of the unprecedented amount of online personal data we observe today. It is about creating new business models and economic opportunities based on this personal data, which has been called a new currency, or asset. It will give individuals the means to control how this asset is used. In doing so, an awareness of the importance of privacy will develop on one hand and on the other privacy by design will become one of the key principles of the concrete solutions that ecosystem members are developing. In this article, we will offer a quick introduction to privacy and then move on to describe concrete resources and approaches to Privacy-By-Design, which is the idea of “baking in” privacy up front into the design of software architectures, rather than considering it a secondary or 3rd-party aspect of classic software engineering or deployment.
|
||||
* [Personal Data Journal: Startup Technology Report](https://danubetech.com/download/PDEC-Tech-Research-Phase-One-Report.pdf)
|
||||
>The Internet Society thorough our Trust and Identity Initiatives have followed with great interest the work of the user-centric developers and deployers within the Identity EcoSystem. The recent work on Personal Data offers a number of interesting choices for individual users and we are pleased to support this initial survey of some of the leading solutions currently under way. It is our hope this information will encourage additional dialogue within the community and will lead to greater interoperability and better engagement with end-users.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### 2015
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#1: XDI, Blockstore, and BIP32](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot1-sf/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/cool-hack-xdi-blockstore-bip32.md)
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a semantic graph technology for modeling, accessing, and linking any data online. It is similar to RDF insofar as it is also based on triples describing a graph of nodes that represent resources (called "contexts" in XDI), properties that connect resources (called "relations" in XDI), and literals. Unlike RDF which uses opaque URIs (mostly HTTP) as identifiers and which constructs all semantics purely from the graph structure, XDI identifiers use an abstract syntax where semantics are established not only from graph structure, but also from the identifiers themselves. For example, in RDF an identifier for a person may be http://danubetech.com#markus, whereas in XDI, an identifier for a person would be =markus. XDI often assigns two or more identifiers to a resource, e.g. while =markus is considered a "reassignable XDI name", a corresponding "permanent XDI number" such as =!:uuid:91f28153-f600-ae24-91f2-8153f600ae24 may also be assigned. Simply by parsing the identifiers, some limited semantics can already be extracted ("=" stands for person, "!" stands for permanent).
|
||||
* [Decentralized Public Key Infrastructure](https://danubetech.com/download/dpki.pdf)
|
||||
>Today’s Internet places control of online identities into the hands of third-parties. Email addresses, usernames, and website domains are borrowed or "rented" through DNS, X.509, and social networks. This results in severe usability and security challenges Internet-wide. This paper describes a possible alternate approach called decentralized public key infrastructure (DPKI), which returns control of online identities to the entities they belong to. By doing so, DPKI addresses many usability and security challenges that plague traditional public key infrastructure (PKI). DPKI has advantages at each stage of the PKI life cycle. It makes permissionless bootstrapping of online identities possible and provides for the simple creation of stronger SSL certificates. In usage, it can help “Johnny” to finally encrypt thanks to its relegation of public key management to secure decentralized datastores. Finally, it includes mechanisms to recover lost or compromised identifiers.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2016
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#2: XDI Graphs in IPFS](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot2-id2020/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/XDI-Graphs-in-IPFS.md)
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a technology for modeling, storing and connecting any kind of personal and organizational data. Its underlying data model is a graph consisting of nodes and directed arcs. XDI is well-suited for digital identity that is distributed and heterogeneous. Through the use of mappings and connectors, XDI can be used to model even data that is not itself natively in XDI format (e.g. a Facebook profile, a government ID, or a record in a corporate database). Traditionally, XDI assumes a network topology that involves service providers and endpoints, e.g. a connection can be established between an individual and an organization through their respective endpoints.
|
||||
* [RWoT#3: JXD Examples](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot3-sf/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/JXD-Examples.md)
|
||||
>JXD is a JSON-based serialization format for the XDI graph model, designed to combine the simplicity of JSON with the semantic richness of XDI.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>An XDI graph can sometimes be serialized to JXD in different ways (some more verbose, some more compact), but deserializing a JXD back to XDI always results in the same original XDI graph. Every XDI graph can be serialized to JXD, and every JXD document can be deserialized to a valid XDI graph.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>An XDI graph is built from XDI context nodes, which form a semantic tree. In JXD, an XDI context node is represented as a JSON object, with an @id JSON object key set to the XDI context node’s address.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### 2017
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#4: XDI Verifiable Claims and Link Contracts](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot4-paris/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/xdi-verifiable-claims-link-contracts.md)
|
||||
>There is a high level of interest in the Rebooting-the-Web-of-Trust community and beyond in "verifiable claims", i.e. "a cryptographically non-repudiable set of statements made by an entity about another entity" (see [1]). This work foresees that "the next generation of web applications will authorize entities to perform actions based on rich sets of credentials issued by trusted parties" (see [2]).
|
||||
>
|
||||
>XDI (eXtensible Data Interchange) is a technology for modeling, storing and sharing personal and organizational identity data. One key component of this technology is the "link contract", i.e. a "data sharing agreement between the publisher of the data, called the authorizing authority, and a party who wants to access the data, called the requesting authority" (see [3]).
|
||||
>
|
||||
>XDI link contracts contain a policy tree which is used to decide if the permissions granted by the link contract can be invoked by a requesting authority. This policy evaluates conditions based on input elements such as the authorizing authority, requesting authority, and an incoming request message. Simple conditions of the policy could e.g. require the presentation of a valid password or signature.
|
||||
* [A Universal Resolver for Self-Sovereign Identifiers](https://medium.com/decentralized-identity/a-universal-resolver-for-self-sovereign-identifiers-48e6b4a5cc3c)
|
||||
>This tool fulfills a similar purpose as Bind does in the DNS system: resolution of identifiers. However, instead of working with domain names, we work with self-sovereign identifiers that can be created and registered directly by the entities they refer to. This is important, because identifiers are the basis for any identity and communications system — without identifiers, we cannot have relationships, transactions, data sharing or messaging between entities. Historically identifiers have always been assigned to us by some kind of corporate or state authority. The Universal Resolver lets us build architectures and protocols on top of identifiers that are completely self-sovereign. There is no longer a need for a central authority to issue, maintain and revoke identifiers.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>However, just having an identifier is not enough. We need some further information in order to know how to communicate with the entity represented by the identifier. The job of a “Resolver” is to discover and retrieve this further information. At a minimum, this information includes elements such as service endpoints for communicating with the entity, as well as the cryptographic keys associated with it. The Universal Resolver performs this task to enable the basic building blocks of a self-sovereign identity world.
|
||||
* [RWoT#5: First XDI Link Contract between "btcr" DID and "sov" DID](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot5-boston/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/first-xdi-link-contract-between-btcr-did-and-sov-did.md)
|
||||
>We describe an XDI link contract established between two XDI peers, one of which is identified by a btcr DID, and one by a sov DID. We believe this is the first working example of cross-DID-method data sharing and messaging.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2018
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#6: Introduction to DID Auth](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot6-santabarbara/blob/master/final-documents/did-auth.md)
|
||||
>The term DID Auth has been used in different ways and is currently not well-defined. We define DID Auth as a ceremony where an identity owner, with the help of various components such as web browsers, mobile devices, and other agents, proves to a relying party that they are in control of a DID. This means demonstrating control of the DID using the mechanism specified in the DID Document's "authentication" object. This could take place using a number of different data formats, protocols, and flows. DID Auth includes the ability to establish mutually authenticated communication channels and to authenticate to web sites and applications. Authorization, Verifiable Credentials, and Capabilities are built on top of DID Auth and are out of scope for this document. This paper gives on overview of the scope of DID Auth, supported protocols and flows, and the use of components of the DID Documents that are relevant to authentication, as well as formats for challenges and responses.
|
||||
* [RWoT#6: did:erc725 method](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot6-santabarbara/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/DID-Method-erc725.md)
|
||||
>Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs, see [1]) are designed to be compatible with any distributed ledger or network (called the target system). In the Ethereum community, a pattern known as ERC725 (see [2]) utilizes smart contracts for standard key management functions. We propose a new DID method that allows ERC725 identities to be treated as valid DIDs. One advantage of this DID method over others appears to be the ability to use the full flexibility of Ethereum smart contracts for key management purposes.
|
||||
* [RWoT#7: DID Resolution Topics](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot7-toronto/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/did-resolution-topics.md)
|
||||
>We know that DID Resolution is the process of obtaining the DID Document associated with a DID. Sounds simple, but what are some of the deeper questions and topics to be considered here?
|
||||
|
||||
### 2019
|
||||
|
||||
* [RWoT#8: Universal DID Operations](https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/Universal-DID-Operations.md)
|
||||
>Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) have seen increasing adoption across a wide number of distributed ledger ecosystems and blockchains. This is in large part due to our ability to effectively communicate by resolving these DIDs. The process of obtaining a DID Document associated with a particular DID is outlined in the DID Resolution spec.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>A blockchain-agnostic implementation of the spec is hosted at the Decentralized Identity Foundation and is fully open-sourced. The Universal Resolver can be found at its website and also runs locally or remotely through an API. It currently supports DIDs on Sovrin, BTCR, uPort, Jolocom, Veres One, ERC-725, Blockstack, IPFS, and DNS via a number of community-contributed drivers built on top of the Universal Resolver.
|
||||
* [Markus Sabadello and Infominer33 on Identity Landscape](https://kumu.io/vijarn/markus-sabadello-and-infominer33-on-identity-landscape)
|
||||
>Combination of Markus Sabadello and Infominer33 githubs
|
||||
>
|
||||
>about Self Sovereign Identity and Identity Landscape.
|
||||
>
|
||||
>This may take longer time to load and longer time to response to commands such as showcasing control since there are a lot of elements and codes.
|
||||
* [Potential of ICTs for Peace](https://danubetech.com/download/Potential-of-ICTs-for-Peace.pdf)
|
||||
>Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have greatly transformed societies, cultures and economies as well as created both new opportunities and threats for humankind. The academic field of Peace and Conflict Studies with its inherent character of being based on concrete values rather than striving to always be objective on all accounts is especially suited and challenged to explore how ICTs should be judged and used when it comes to working toward an ideal – the ideal of peace. This paper provides a short motivation for working in this area as well a summary of work that has already been done, then moves on to giving a quick overview over ICTs and especially the Internet as an electronic medium, and finally explores several concrete ways in which ICTs can be used for peace: As a tool by international organizations, as a weapon in nonviolent struggle, and as a pillar for building and maintaining peaceful societies.
|
||||
* [Potential of ICTs for Conflict](https://danubetech.com/download/Potential-of-ICTs-for-Conflict.pdf)
|
||||
>Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have greatly transformed societies, cultures and economies as well as created both new opportunities and threats for humankind. Since at least Manuel Castells’ widely cited book trilogy “The Information Age”1, we have a good scientific understanding of the causes, nature and consequences of today’s interconnected society that is the result of the spreading of ICTs and the globalization processes accompanying them. And since at least the World Summit on the Information Society2, which culminated in its second phase in 2005 in Tunis, the United Nations as well as a large amount of other stakeholders have been working on evaluating the potential of ICTs for the values of peace and democracy, as well as the risks of conflict and abuse caused by such technologies.
|
||||
* [Comparing terrorist and Internet networks](https://danubetech.com/download/Comparing-terrorist-and-Internet-networks.pdf)
|
||||
>The network, stronger than the node, Can circumvent a failing part, Security and control code keep alive the network’s heart. But what if every spark goes dark, abandons network, node and core, what if they cease to light the night, because the people send no more?
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user