Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

Meeting Date

  • The ToIP Trust Registry Task Force (TRTF) meets weekly twice every Thursday at the following times (to cover global time zones - see the Calendar of ToIP Meetings for full meeting info including Zoom links):
    • NA/EU 07:00-8:00 PT / 15:00-16:00 UTC 
    • APAC 18:00-19:00 PT / 02:00-03:00 UTC

Zoom Meeting Link / Recording

Attendees

NA/EU Meeting

APAC Meeting

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
5 min
  • Start recording
  • Welcome & antitrust notice
  • Introduction of new members
  • Agenda review
Chairs
  • Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
  • New Members:
5 minReview of previous action itemsChairsThe action items from the 2022-12-23 meeting all appeared to be agenda items for this meeting.
5 minHeads up on W3C Credentials Community Group work itemChairs

As an FYI, the W3C Credentials Community Group (CCG) has adopted a work item on "Verifiable Issuers and Verifiers" based on this 2022 Rebooting the Web of Trust paper: https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot11-the-hague/blob/master/final-documents/verifiable-issuers-and-verifiers.pdf

Drummond Reed : 

Savita Farooqui : TRAIN (using DNS-based trust) is another input

  • mathieu : Projects referenced in the paper that I’m assuming all need good understanding/alignment: EBSI Trusted Issuer Registry, ETSI TS 119 612, eSSIF-Lab TRAIN, the Trust over IP Foundation Trust Registry Protocol
    • DNS being brought up frequently. 
  • Neil Thomson : Projects referenced in the paper that I’m assuming all need good understanding/alignment: EBSI Trusted Issuer Registry, ETSI TS 119 612, eSSIF-Lab TRAIN, the Trust over IP Foundation Trust Registry Protocol
  • Drummond Reed interesting to consider how DNS will inform TR work. 
  • Savita Farooqui : All registries and the overlap with TR are to consider. 
  • Drummond Reed : AIDs (Autonomous Identifiers ): You can discover an AID anywhere and independently verify it. 
  • Savita Farooqui : What provides trust. 
  • Tim Bouma : Experimenting with blind signatures. Trust is context. 
20 minsAlignment on a way forwardChairs

Proposal of a way forward that people can align on. 

15 minsPrimary modelsAndor 

Primary models and basic evolution approach for future versions

Tim Bouma :Transfer function: Time and utility preference. 

Drummond Reed  v1 spec: 
    * Verifiable issuers vs. Verifiable verifiers. 
    * @Darrell: Context was required to authorize issuers vs. verifiers. RWOT: naive. Assurance framework not the whole picture.

Tim Bouma : risk transfer vs. accountability transfer. Risk management function. 

* **Trust Action Model**: $h(g(f(C, x)))$
    * where: 
        * $f(C, x)$ is a trust embedding 
        * $g(f(C, x))$ is a trust decision
        * $h(g(f(C, x))) = z$ represents an action (or effect) based upon a trust decision. It chooses $z_i \in \mathbb{Z}$ where $\mathbb{Z}$ represents a set of possible effects from a trust decision. 
        * $C$ is the decision context
        * $x$ is the set of claims
    * Scope: This task force is focused on supporting system around $c_{\text{trust services}}$ and the data models in $x$, which represent claims. While recommendations may be provided on the other functions, anything outside of $c_{\text{trust services}}$ and $x$ is considered non-normative and out of scope. Some ways this translates within the deliverable:
        * Specification Deliverable
            * Service Discovery
            * Containers
            * Data Models
            * APIs 
        * Companion Guide:
            * Recommendations and best practices
* $\{c_i, c_j\} \in C$ where C is the decision context and $c_i, c_j$, are different data contexts. 
* $x$ represents claim data

rendered here: https://hackmd.io/7FGDfgIfTBWrd1wQ7RngSQ

5 minsCollaboration toolsAll

Agreement about how to move forward on collaboration. Google docs or Github

5 mins
  • Review decisions/action items
  • Planning for next meeting 
Chairs

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

 



Decisions

  • Sample Decision Item

Action Items


  • No labels