Co-Leads:

ID2020 PM:

Participants:

Time	Item	Who
2 min	Welcome & Antitrust Policy Notice	Chair
XY min	Topic A	TBC
XY min	Topic B	TBC
XY min	Topic C	TBC
3 min	Wrap up	Chair

(PDFs posted)

1. Welcome and Linux Foundation antitrust policy

The way we have structured GHP is around the three zones.

Could use biometric binding

The cert doesn’t need to happen at the same time as vac - linking it to a person is in fact linking it to an identity

[Dan] - We are talking about assurance levels. Biometrics is one way.

Ideally at the point of vac a live photo is captured - this would work on paper as well.
All of the cred that are already out there are not likely to change their model
We need to collaborate on what good looks like and the consequences of making compromise.
Add assurance level to the cred so the verifier can decide.

[Paco] what is the minimum level we need across the three zones.

Can add the concept of late binding to provide enough trust in each zone. Today we use a PDF document which is not verifiable.

[Scott]

We state that we can’t give the answers to everything but we can give recommendations.

[Bryn]

Economics and the commercials around this topic of identity binding would also need to be considered. Especially when the beneficiary is some org like an airport, border control etc. Providers of health pass solutions have the ability to implement the specifics of identity binding. ‘Who is paying for things, who is going to invest in technology and who are the beneficiaries’
GHP not being ‘perfect’ health pass collaborative. Looking at solutions which can be rolled out in a quick time scale.
[Daniel B] Economics for getting people vaccinated and getting vaccination certificates becomes much simpler in absence of international travel. ‘I have the means to travel internationally and I need to prove at the destination country of my status’. What good looks like could be broken up into major use cases

[Rob Haslam] Can it be legislated in advance as to what it is needed for? Because the usage are many

[Paco] Might not be useful to get into predicting the future. However, we can define levels of assurance specific to each Zone. WG recommendations could be around what needs to happen for LoAs across the different zones.
[Bryn] What do we need to do between now and meeting up next week?

Please read the draft paper being put together
Need individuals to comment on the paper - both on what exists and what is possibly missing (eg. ‘this needs to change, for this reason and this is the change’). Add rationale if there is additional information and section
The overall blueprint outline is published on the GHP site. Socialize that through the professional network to give a shout-out.
Conversations in this WG would have an impact on other WGs. eg. Identity Binding would have impact on the Credential Definition
[Todd] All files for this group are on google drive here: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1LFF5ipUmE1moxjc9pzndMdyBlit-bm0e
[Paco] What are the key questions and what do we need to focus on in the very short term

[Todd] we can use them to isolate what we are going to focus on. Will be working with Bryn to enable taking in comments/edits as well

Action Items

Browser not supported