10 ms·

> Real cryptographic unlinkability schemes like BBS+ or CL signatures would produce uncorrelated proofs even on reuse. This is not that. This discussion was al

> Real cryptographic unlinkability schemes like BBS+ or CL signatures would produce uncorrelated proofs even on reuse. This is not that. This discussion was already led ad nauseam with the Swiss eID proposal (which is supposed to be EUID compatible) and the reason why the system relies on rotating signatures instead of ZKPs is that the cryptography hardware modules in most phones don't support algorithms such as BBS+. This creates a tradeoff where the states would have to essentially roll their own crypto storage and bank on this being safer than simply rotating through batches of signatures generated by the hardware cryptography modules (which is largely unproblematic in the grand scheme of things). The major advantage of using the hardware module is that it makes it much harder for attackers to extract the actual secret should the device ever fall into someone else's hands, something that happens to phones from time to time. Overall, as with every digital ID thread, it would help if some of the fearmon gering commentators would read the actually EUDI specs for once in their lives as it already addresses most of the concerns copy-pasted into these threads https://eudi.dev/1.6.0/architecture-and-reference-framework-main/ https://eudi.dev/1.6.0/architecture-and-reference-framework-....

raverbashing 5mo ago
> Overall, as with every digital ID thread, it would help if some of the fearmon gering commentators would read the actually EUDI specs for once in their lives Yeah I'm getting really really tired of the "crying wolf" crowd
- thomasingalls 5mo ago
  Just because the government is not out to get you at this exact moment doesn't mean that a future government won't be. Surveillance capacity seems to be a one way ratchet.
  - bootsmann 5mo ago
    What surveillance capacity? In what way does the spec build surveillance capacity?
    - greenavocado 5mo ago
      Mandatory app installation through the mandatory state sanctioned rootkit Google Play store and 4G/5G LTE modems on-chip management engines. And that doesn't even cover the ubiquitous app data partnerships which report your information upstream.
      - dzhiurgis 5mo ago
        97% of population is ok with this
        thomasingalls 5mo ago
        Not having a choice is not the same as consent
        dzhiurgis 5mo ago
        But you do have a choice. No one is takin away your physical IDs. But vast majority of population is begging for a safe digital ID solution. Cash is still mostly accepted while majority of transactions are digital.
        greenavocado 5mo ago
        > vast majority of population is begging for a safe digital ID solution Absolutely not. The population is fine with the status quo.
        dzhiurgis 5mo ago
        Huh? Maybe in Europe, yes where digital ID has been around for _decades_. In US tho? You can get SSN of literally everyone and that's somehow enough to ID yourself.
- jeroenhd 5mo ago
  To be fair to some of them, across the Atlantic the Americans are implementing similar laws in absolutely ridiculous ways. Many Americans don't even have ID (and plenty of those are reluctant to the general concept of any kind of government ID), let alone any kind of digital ID. However, their governments are pushing frankly weird and absurd ID verification laws to businesses online. Meta seems to be bankrolling lobbying around these laws, so whatever their game is, it's probably very bad for normal people. If you're coming from a place where the government tells companies they need to set up a system or hire private companies to verify users' ages without providing any kind of official mechanism themselves, leading to ridiculous hacks from cheap and incompetent "age verification" companies, I can understand why the European system seems absurd. If the US is going to adopt their weird age verification laws, the least they could do is fork the European system already laid out for them. Put a little American flag on it, call it "America First Christian Age Truthness" or whatever the people in charge like, but at least keep the basic privacy properties intact.
  - petre 5mo ago
    Relax, it would probably buit by Palantir and operated by Meta /s.
    - aquariusDue 5mo ago
      I thought that's what the blue checkmark on X was for already /s
    - dzhiurgis 5mo ago
      You joke, but at least it would work well, be secure and cost appropriate. All at a cost of imaginary privacy that you don’t have already.
  - SoftTalker 5mo ago
    > Many Americans don't even have ID I don't believe this. "Many" perhaps in raw out-of-context numbers but as a percentage of the population, very few functioning, self-supporting and employed adults in America do not have an ID. It's simply not possible to participate in society without one. You need an ID to register a car, to drive, to vote, to bank, to get a job, to buy a house, to rent an apartment, to get water, power, gas, internet.... If you don't have an ID, you are either a child, or you are deliberately trying to exist off the record. I.e. you are here illegally or you have chosen some very fringe antisocial survivalist offgrid way of living.
fauigerzigerk 5mo ago
Have you read the spec? I have, but I don't understand how the revocation flow is supposed to be safe against collusion between issuers/governments and site owners to reveal the identity of (age verified) users.
- bootsmann 5mo ago
  Can you model the flow of the attack you want to mount here? Is it the following: Issuer revokes the wallet of Alice and then publicly says “This ID is Alice btw” and then verifiers can check their lists to see whether any of their received signatures are revoked (in which case they must be Alice)
  - fauigerzigerk 5mo ago
    The EU's own experts have modeled it. At least that's my understanding of what they are saying in their "Privacy risks and mitigation" document [1]. Section 5 mentions that this issue could be mitigated at some point in the future by using ZKPs, but here's what they're saying about the status of this ZKP integration: "This topic will be revisited in Topic G to determine the foundational requirements needed for its future integration" Doesn't sound like this will be implemented any time soon. [1] https://eudi.dev/2.5.0/discussion-topics/a-privacy-risks-and-mitigations/ https://eudi.dev/2.5.0/discussion-topics/a-privacy-risks-and...
gspr 5mo ago
I'd very much like to read up on the various proposed ID systems, pros and cons and experience. Do you have a good starting point to recommend beyond "(insert country) eID" on Wikipedia?

raverbashing 5mo ago

> Overall, as with every digital ID thread, it would help if some of the fearmon gering commentators would read the actually EUDI specs for once in their lives Yeah I'm getting really really tired of the "crying wolf" crowd

thomasingalls 5mo ago
Just because the government is not out to get you at this exact moment doesn't mean that a future government won't be. Surveillance capacity seems to be a one way ratchet.
- bootsmann 5mo ago
  What surveillance capacity? In what way does the spec build surveillance capacity?
  - greenavocado 5mo ago
    Mandatory app installation through the mandatory state sanctioned rootkit Google Play store and 4G/5G LTE modems on-chip management engines. And that doesn't even cover the ubiquitous app data partnerships which report your information upstream.
    - dzhiurgis 5mo ago
      97% of population is ok with this
      - thomasingalls 5mo ago
        Not having a choice is not the same as consent
        dzhiurgis 5mo ago
        But you do have a choice. No one is takin away your physical IDs. But vast majority of population is begging for a safe digital ID solution. Cash is still mostly accepted while majority of transactions are digital.
        greenavocado 5mo ago
        > vast majority of population is begging for a safe digital ID solution Absolutely not. The population is fine with the status quo.
        dzhiurgis 5mo ago
        Huh? Maybe in Europe, yes where digital ID has been around for _decades_. In US tho? You can get SSN of literally everyone and that's somehow enough to ID yourself.
jeroenhd 5mo ago
To be fair to some of them, across the Atlantic the Americans are implementing similar laws in absolutely ridiculous ways. Many Americans don't even have ID (and plenty of those are reluctant to the general concept of any kind of government ID), let alone any kind of digital ID. However, their governments are pushing frankly weird and absurd ID verification laws to businesses online. Meta seems to be bankrolling lobbying around these laws, so whatever their game is, it's probably very bad for normal people. If you're coming from a place where the government tells companies they need to set up a system or hire private companies to verify users' ages without providing any kind of official mechanism themselves, leading to ridiculous hacks from cheap and incompetent "age verification" companies, I can understand why the European system seems absurd. If the US is going to adopt their weird age verification laws, the least they could do is fork the European system already laid out for them. Put a little American flag on it, call it "America First Christian Age Truthness" or whatever the people in charge like, but at least keep the basic privacy properties intact.
- petre 5mo ago
  Relax, it would probably buit by Palantir and operated by Meta /s.
  - aquariusDue 5mo ago
    I thought that's what the blue checkmark on X was for already /s
  - dzhiurgis 5mo ago
    You joke, but at least it would work well, be secure and cost appropriate. All at a cost of imaginary privacy that you don’t have already.
- SoftTalker 5mo ago
  > Many Americans don't even have ID I don't believe this. "Many" perhaps in raw out-of-context numbers but as a percentage of the population, very few functioning, self-supporting and employed adults in America do not have an ID. It's simply not possible to participate in society without one. You need an ID to register a car, to drive, to vote, to bank, to get a job, to buy a house, to rent an apartment, to get water, power, gas, internet.... If you don't have an ID, you are either a child, or you are deliberately trying to exist off the record. I.e. you are here illegally or you have chosen some very fringe antisocial survivalist offgrid way of living.

fauigerzigerk 5mo ago

Have you read the spec? I have, but I don't understand how the revocation flow is supposed to be safe against collusion between issuers/governments and site owners to reveal the identity of (age verified) users.

bootsmann 5mo ago
Can you model the flow of the attack you want to mount here? Is it the following: Issuer revokes the wallet of Alice and then publicly says “This ID is Alice btw” and then verifiers can check their lists to see whether any of their received signatures are revoked (in which case they must be Alice)
- fauigerzigerk 5mo ago
  The EU's own experts have modeled it. At least that's my understanding of what they are saying in their "Privacy risks and mitigation" document [1]. Section 5 mentions that this issue could be mitigated at some point in the future by using ZKPs, but here's what they're saying about the status of this ZKP integration: "This topic will be revisited in Topic G to determine the foundational requirements needed for its future integration" Doesn't sound like this will be implemented any time soon. [1] https://eudi.dev/2.5.0/discussion-topics/a-privacy-risks-and-mitigations/ https://eudi.dev/2.5.0/discussion-topics/a-privacy-risks-and...

gspr 5mo ago

I'd very much like to read up on the various proposed ID systems, pros and cons and experience. Do you have a good starting point to recommend beyond "(insert country) eID" on Wikipedia?