Re: [cnit] [stir] draft-peterson-stir-threats-00.txt

Yes, but we might be able to thread certification of various aspects to a single identity that we can use to coalesce the information.

That identity COULD be the phone number (using proof of possession), but I suspect that isn’t quite enough.

Brian

On Nov 7, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> wrote:

> Henning,
> 
>> As a thought experiment, Kumiko Ono and I had published a draft
>>  
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ono-dispatch-attribute-validation-00
>>  
>> to allow third parties to validate property information. If the validating party (e.g., a bank regulator) is willing to sign a certificate, similar in spirit to the framed gold-leaf diplomas in your dentist’s office or, more lowly, to the health departments rating in a restaurant window, and it can be tied to a phone number, this shouldn’t be too hard.
>>  
>> It’s a bit harder if the certifying authority (regulator, Realtor board, local bar association, …) is not involved.
> The tricky part is ensuring that a certificate (using the term broadly) issued by some
> organization is not interpreted by relying parties as meaning more than it should.
> 
> It is not clear to me that most entities are good choices for the binding of a name
> to a phone number. In part this is because these entities do not consider the phone
> number to be a critical aspect of the attributes for which they vouch.
> 
> My dentist's diploma is valid irrespective of the location (much less the phone number)
> for his office. BTW, as the geographic boundaries for area code change, phone numbers
> change. My home didn't move and it took a while for many of the records held by other 
> parties to be updated. So, no, I would not rely on many parties of the sort you seem to suggest,
> to issue a credential binding my name to a phone nmber
> 
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> cnit mailing list
> cnit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cnit