Hi Watson, I thought it was a good suggestion and am looking forward to feedback from others.
I didn't understand the part of the statement in the penultimate sentence which says, "but cannot work for Issuers". I should probably understand what you meant without having to ask, but I don't. Can you please elaborate what you meant about workarounds such as issuing multiple one-time-use credentials at once (if I understood that correctly) not working for issuers? Pierce CONFIDENTIAL -----Original Message----- From: Watson Ladd <watsonbl...@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 5:51 PM To: IETF oauth WG <oauth@ietf.org> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] Reminder: Alternative text for sd-jwt privacy considerations. EXTERNAL EMAIL Dear oauth wg, Happy 2025! I hope everyone has had a nice set of holidays. As a reminder I put forward the following proposal for text to add to either privacy or security considerations of sd-jwt, but the timing was unfortunate, coming Christmas eve. Comments on it welcome. "SD-JWT conceals only the values that aren't revealed. It does not meet standard security notations for anonymous credentials. In particular Verifiers and Issuers can know when they have seen the same credential no matter what fields have been opened, even none of them. This behavior may not accord with what users naively expect or are lead to expect from UX interactions and lead to them make choices they would not otherwise make. Workarounds such as issuing multiple credentials at once and using them only one time can help for keeping Verifiers from linking different showing, but cannot work for Issuers. This issue applies to all selective disclosure based approaches, including mdoc. " Sincerely, Watson -- Astra mortemque praestare gradatim _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list -- oauth@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to oauth-le...@ietf.org _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list -- oauth@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to oauth-le...@ietf.org
