26 February 2024

Attendees

  • Aditya Khurjekar, Prove

  • Andy Rosen

  • Chris Staines, Arkeytyp

  • Christian Paquin, Microsoft

  • Drummond Reed, Gen Digital

  • Edmond Cunningham, Arkeytyp

  • Eric Scouten, Adobe

  • Francisc Romano, Adobe

  • Frank _, Verus

  • Gavin Peacock, Adobe

  • Jacques Latour, CIRA

  • Jesse Carter, CIRA

  • John Collomosse, Adobe

  • Judith Fleenor, Trust Over IP Foundation

  • Karen Kilroy, FileBaby

  • Lindsay Walker, Starling Labs

  • Lorie Groth, Digicert

  • Michael Klein, Adobe

  • Nick Lyons, Arkeytyp

  • Orie Steele, Transmute

  • Orson Weems, FileBaby

  • Peleus Uhley, Adobe

  • Pia Blumenthal, Adobe

  • Shrey Jain, Microsoft

  • Stu Vaeth, Mastercard

  • Truman Esmond, Partnership for Insurance Information

  • Will Kreth, HAND (Human & Digital) Identity

  • Wynne Kim, HAND (Human & Digital) Identity

Agenda

5 min: Start meeting

  • Start recording

  • Welcome and community specification license reminder

  • Agenda review and call for agenda items

10 min: New members introduction

🎥 1'56": New to this meeting:

  • Drummond Reed, Gen Digital and Trust Over IP

  • Francisc Romano, Adobe, Identity Management

  • Jacques Latour, CIRA

  • Jesse Carter, CIRA

  • Karen Kilroy, FileBaby

  • Lindsay Walker, Starling Labs

  • Orson Weems, FileBaby

  • Peleus Uhley, Adobe

  • Christian Paquin, Microsoft

  • Truman Esmond, Partnership for Insurance Information

2 min: Action item update

🎥 7'53": From previous meeting, most items will carry over to this week:

5 min: Remove discussion of using W3C verifiable presentations

🎥 8'16": Discuss PR #45: Remove discussion of using W3C verifiable presentations. (Based on discussion in last week’s meeting.)

DECISION: Approved. PR has since been merged and new version of spec has been published.

15 min: Roadmap proposal

🎥 9'47": Discussion of proposal to fast-track a subset of this specification and allow more time for other portions to mature.

Proposal is to:

  • Work toward a 1.0 milestone with X.509 credentials only to enable some business partners to proceed quickly.

  • Work toward a fast-follow 1.x milestone with W3C VCs, which will require more time and discussion to get right.

DECISION: Approved.

ACTION (Issue #52: Roadmap: Fast-track X.509 portion of spec and fast-follow with W3C VC portion): Eric to propose PR that splits proposed versions accordingly.

Additional discussion:

🎥 19'15": Discuss issue #46: Authoring vs ownership.

Consider writing an explicit statement in the identity assertion as to whether copyright and/or ownership is in scope for identity. If it isn’t, is copyright perhaps better expressed in a separate metadata assertion?

This led into related discussions about advertising content and the semantic difference between gathered and created assertions (which is more properly a C2PA discussion).

DECISION: Group affirms the sentiment expressed in the issue that the identity assertion should convey authorship and not ownership or copyright.

ACTION (Issue #46: Authoring vs ownership): Eric to draft new wording clarifying that identity is about authorship and not ownership or copyright.

ACTION (not tracked here, as not directly relevant to CAWG): Andy Rosen to raise questions about created vs gathered assertions in C2PA.

During the discussion on this topic, a question was raised as to whether anonymized credentisl might be expressed in the standard to create a mechanism for after-the-fact assertions of content authorship.

ACTION (Issue #53: Explore questions of anonymized credentials and how they might be expressed in the standard): Lindsay Walker to explore questions of anonymized credentials and how they might be expressed in the standard and report to group.

Orie raised the concern that the timestamp information from signer is not necessarily trustworthy and that signatures could be back-dated to mislead about their validity. Added issue #54: Ensure that time stamps are properly linked to identity assertion signatures to track that issue.

10 min: Advertising use case

Is there an alternative wording that would work better or should we delete this use case?

This discussion substially overlapped the previous agenda item.

ACTION (issue #47: No advertisements in North America work as described): Andy Rosen to propose new wording.

15 min: KERI, AIDs and ACDCs as an alternative approach

Can this be represented via did:webs and/or did:keri or does it need a third sig_type?

How implementable is this, given currently-available open-source libraries?

Representatives of this issue were not present today; deferred discussion.

Other assertions

🎥 45'22": John Collomosse raises question of the other assertions.

ACTION: Eric to create repos for other assertion types (endorsements, training and data mining, and metadata) and raise them to candidate status.

Other identity formats

🎥 48'16": An impromptu discussion emerged at the end of the meeting about other credential formats for this group to consider:

ACTION (Issue #57: Lightweight PKI option anchoring to a web domain): Christian Paquin offered to work on a proposal for a lightweight PKI option anchoring to a web domain which he hopes to share by next meeting.

Upcoming: ICANN workshop

Eric and Santiago Lyon will be presenting at ICANN79 on 6 March 2024, similar to ToIP presentation

ACTION: Eric to add link to upcoming session.

ACTION (Issue #58: Readout on ICANN workshop meetings): Jacques Latour requests 20 min for meeting two weeks from now to review ICANN workshop outcomes.

5 min: Closing and review

Invitation to subsequent meetings, which will typically be on Mondays.

Decisions

Summary of decisions from this meeting:

Action items

Summary of new action items from this meeting: