via lists.spdx.org
Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 10:24 AM
To: SPDX-list
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [spdx-tech] Identities
Gary,
Yes.
The W3C Distributed Identifiers
Architecture<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fdid-core%2F%23architecture-overview
provided would
> support a BlockChain like approach which does not have a centralized
> “authority”.
>
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> *From:* Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org *On Behalf Of
> *William Bartholomew (CELA) via lists.spdx.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2023 4:14 PM
> *
Upd:
https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/61177 ,
https://github.com/sigstore/fulcio/issues/973#issuecomment-1399566544
Google, and Microsoft do not allow account reuse afted deletion.
Vladimir
--
Vladimir
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/
>If "john_sm...@hotmail.com" is an active identity in 2021 and 2022, it is
impossible to know if they are the same identity or two different identities
Have you checked OIDC/OAuth?
As someone passes the challenge, the authority responds with a unique id
which is never reused for different identiti
*William Bartholomew (CELA) via lists.spdx.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2023 4:14 PM
> *To:* SPDX-list ; dk1...@gmail.com
> *Subject:* Re: [spdx-tech] Identities
>
>
>
> These all seem reasonable to me. My only comment is that there may not be
> a "formal" autho
gt; *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2023 4:14 PM
> *To:* SPDX-list ; dk1...@gmail.com
> *Subject:* Re: [spdx-tech] Identities
>
>
>
> These all seem reasonable to me. My only comment is that there may not be
> a "formal" authority. For example, an identification sche
11, 2023 4:14 PM
To: SPDX-list ; dk1...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [spdx-tech] Identities
These all seem reasonable to me. My only comment is that there may not be a
"formal" authority. For example, an identification scheme could use an
algorithm to derive a globally unique identifier or
outside of your normal working hours.
From: Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org on behalf of David
Kemp via lists.spdx.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 2:59 PM
To: SPDX-list
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [spdx-tech] Identities
At the tech meeting we decided to accept the curren
At the tech meeting we decided to accept the current identity model and
move forward without blocking the 3.0 release. The discussion covered many
ideas on which no decisions were documented, and I wonder if we can reach
agreement on these points while the discussion is still fresh, without
allowi
