Different types of digital identity
Self-Sovereign Identity
Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) is a digital identity model that places the highest level of control and ownership in the hands of individuals or businesses. It's a transformative approach that empowers users to store, manage, and share their personal data without relying on central repositories or intermediaries.
At the core of SSI are three main elements: Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs), Verifiable Credentials (VCs), and Blockchain technology.
Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs)
These are unique, global identifiers created and controlled by users, independent of any centralized authority. They are built on decentralized systems like blockchains, enhancing privacy and security as they do not contain personally identifiable information.
Verifiable Credentials (VCs)
These digital credentials are more secure than traditional forms of identity proofing. They use digital signatures to validate authenticity, making them resistant to tampering. Users can present these credentials to organizations or verifiers, who can then quickly check their validity directly from the issuer.
Blockchain
The blockchain acts as a decentralized database or ledger, forming the backbone of SSI. It ensures the integrity and immutability of stored data, providing a robust and tamper-proof system for managing digital identities.
User control
SSI assumes a high degree of digital literacy and access to technology, which might not be universally available. This raises concerns about potential social inequalities and exclusion for those with limited access to technology.
In terms of user control, SSI represents one end of the spectrum in digital identity frameworks. It offers maximum control to the user over their personal data and identity, contrasted with more centralized systems where control is vested in external entities like governments or organizations. The SSI model facilitates a high level of privacy and security, as it minimizes the risk of data breaches and unauthorized access that are more common in centralized systems.
However, this user-centric approach comes with its own set of challenges. Users are responsible for their own security, and the complexity of managing personal data and permissions can be daunting. Additionally, the practical implementation of SSI can vary, potentially leading to differences in the levels of control and security offered.
Self-Sovereign Identity represents a paradigm shift in digital identity management, focusing on user empowerment and privacy, but it requires careful consideration of its practical implementation and potential social impact.
Decentralized identity
Decentralized Identity (DI) represents a significant shift in the way digital identities are managed, moving away from centralized control towards user empowerment. This approach uses distributed ledger technology (DLT), such as blockchain, to create a network where identity information is securely stored, shared, and verified.
The fundamental process of decentralized identity involves:
- Creating a decentralized identity: Users can create their own decentralized identity through platforms like Metamask, Sovrin, uPort, or Microsoft’s ION. Each user is assigned a unique Decentralized Identifier (DID), along with cryptographic keys (public and private) for secure access.
- Receiving Verifiable Credentials: Reputable organizations, such as governments or educational institutions, can issue digital certificates to individuals, which are secure and verifiable.
- Storing identity details: Digital wallets provide a secure way for individuals to store and manage their credentials.
- Checking identity: Users have control over what information they share and with whom, enhancing privacy and reducing risks associated with traditional identity systems.
Benefits
The benefits of decentralized identity are substantial:
- For individuals: It offers enhanced privacy, control over personal data, protection against identity theft, a simplified user experience across platforms, and promotes accessibility and inclusion.
- For organizations: Decentralized identity systems focus on the user, reducing fraud risks, saving costs, ensuring regulatory compliance, and enhancing the company’s reputation for prioritizing privacy and user empowerment.
Concepts
Core concepts of decentralized identity include decentralization, self-sovereign identity (SSI), decentralized identifiers (DIDs), verifiable credentials, interoperability, and blockchain technology. The decentralized nature of the system means there is no single authority controlling the identity data, making the system more secure and trustworthy. Self-sovereign identity allows individuals to have full control over their digital identities, determining what to share and with whom.
Decentralized identity presents a Web3 solution that addresses many drawbacks of centralized identity systems. It ensures privacy, security, interoperability, and cost-effectiveness, handing control back to the individual user. This concept aligns closely with self-sovereign identity, providing users with full control over their digital identity and personal data.
Federated identity
Federated Identity Management (FIM) is a system that enables the linking and management of a user's identity across multiple distinct identity management systems. This approach allows users to access various applications and services using a single set of credentials, enhancing both convenience and security.
How federated identity works
Mutual trust relationships
FIM operates on the basis of mutual trust between a Service Provider (SP) and an Identity Provider (IdP). The IdP is responsible for creating and managing user credentials.
Single Sign-On (SSO)
FIM supports SSO, allowing users to log in once and access multiple services or applications without needing to log in again at each service.
Authentication and authorization
When a user tries to access a service, the SP relies on the IdP to authenticate the user's credentials. After successful authentication, the user can access the required service without having to re-enter credentials.
Technologies used
Common technologies in FIM include Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), OAuth, and OpenID Connect (OIDC). These protocols help in standardizing communications and authentication processes across different systems.
Benefits of federated identity management
- Efficiency and convenience: It reduces the need for multiple logins and passwords, streamlining access to various services.
- Enhanced security: By centralizing authentication, FIM can offer better security and easier management of user access.
- Cost-effective: Organizations can save on developing and maintaining their own identity management solutions.
- Compliance and privacy: FIM can aid in compliance with privacy regulations by controlling and limiting the amount of shared personal information.
Challenges and considerations
- Initial setup costs: Implementing FIM can involve significant upfront costs to modify existing systems.
- Policy negotiation: Organizations within a federation need to agree on common security and privacy policies, which can be complex and time-consuming.
- Inter-federation complexity: Organizations may participate in multiple federations, each with its own set of rules and requirements, adding to the administrative burden. In practice, federated identity is often encountered in everyday digital interactions. For example, using Google or Facebook credentials to log into various websites and services is a common form of federated identity.
Federated Identity Management, with its focus on interoperability and user convenience, is a key component of modern digital ecosystems, facilitating seamless access across different platforms and services while maintaining security and privacy standards.
Government identity
Government identity systems across the world vary significantly in their design, implementation, and the scope of services they offer. These systems are generally created to provide a legal means of identity verification and can encompass a wide range of functionalities.
System interoperability
A critical aspect of these systems is their interoperability, both domestically and internationally. This interoperability allows the ID system to exchange data with other systems, databases, devices, and applications, thus enhancing the utility of the digital ID. For instance, the EU's eIDAS Regulation mandates that all organizations delivering public digital services within an EU member state must recognize electronic identification from other EU member states. This kind of interoperability is vital for activities such as travel, tourism, and immigration.
Innovative approaches in different countries
- In India, the Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile (JAM) initiative links bank accounts, Aadhaar (a unique identity number), and mobile numbers to streamline government benefit programs and promote financial inclusion.
- British Columbia in Canada uses health insurance cards as digital identity tools, providing access to publicly funded health services and other public services online.
- New Zealand has implemented a unique digital identity system for businesses, assigning a unique identifier number to businesses for easier interaction with government agencies.
- Azerbaijan’s Asan Login system is used not only for public services but also by private entities like banks and insurance companies.
Challenges faced
Trust in government and the structure of political systems can pose significant challenges in implementing government identity systems. For example, in countries with federated political systems, there might be different identity systems across government levels, leading to complexity in integration and management. Additionally, ensuring that all segments of the population, including the elderly and the less digitally-savvy, can access and use these systems is a key policy challenge.
Examples from various countries
- Italy's SPID is used for both public and private institutions.
- Monaco offers digital IDs for public institutions and certain services like telecom and electricity.
- Ukraine has introduced online ID cards and an app called "Diia" for various identification purposes.
- In Australia, MyGov/MyGovID and Australia Post DigitaliD provide single sign-on capabilities, with MyGov supporting government agencies and DigitaliD supporting private institutions.
Benefits and risks
Digital ID systems can reduce administrative costs, improve the ease of doing business, and provide a foundation for digitally unifying markets. They also have the potential to reduce fraud and waste.
However, there are risks, including increased state surveillance and concerns around cybersecurity and privacy. Each country's approach to digital identity reflects its unique social, political, and technological landscape, with varying degrees of success and challenges. The integration of these systems into the broader digital ecosystem is a complex task that requires careful consideration of privacy, security, and inclusivity.
Centralized (organizational) identity
Centralized Identity, refers to a framework where an organization centrally manages the identity and access of its users. This centralized approach has several key characteristics and implications:
Central Repository for Identity Data
In centralized identity management, user identity data, including personal details and credentials, are stored in a single location. This centralization simplifies the management of user identities and access rights across the organization's digital assets.
Unified Access and Single Sign-On (SSO)
Users can access a wide range of applications and resources through a single set of login credentials, often facilitated by SSO functionality. This reduces the need for multiple accounts and enhances the user experience by eliminating the hassle of signing in separately for each application.
Streamlined User Lifecycle Management
Centralized systems facilitate efficient user onboarding and offboarding. Adjustments to user access rights due to role changes or departures can be managed quickly and effectively in one place.
Enhanced Security and Compliance
Centralized identity management provides robust security features, including multi-factor authentication and detailed access controls. It also simplifies compliance with regulatory requirements by offering a central point for tracking and auditing user access.
Potential Challenges
One of the main criticisms of centralized identity management is the risk of creating a single point of failure. If a user’s credentials are compromised, it could potentially give attackers access to all resources the user is authorized to access. However, this risk can be mitigated with strong authentication protocols and security measures.
Benefits for Organizations
Centralized identity management systems can reduce IT workloads and intervention, helping to minimize bottlenecks in processes. They also provide better visibility into user behavior and system resources, making it easier to detect and respond to security threats.
Management
Centralized identity management offers organizations a streamlined and secure way to manage user identities and access rights. While there are challenges, particularly around the risk of a single point of failure, these can be mitigated with proper security protocols and technologies. This system simplifies the user experience, enhances security, and aids in compliance efforts.
Anonymous Identity
Anonymous Identity in the digital realm refers to a state where an individual's personal identity is not disclosed or linked to their online actions or presence. This concept is often closely tied to the use of pseudonyms or online personas, allowing individuals to engage in activities or express opinions without revealing their real-world identity.
One of the primary motivations for seeking anonymity online is to facilitate free expression, especially in contexts where revealing one's identity could lead to repercussions. This is particularly crucial for marginalized individuals, activists, researchers, and journalists who might face danger or discrimination if their identities were known. For instance, in authoritarian regimes or environments with oppressive laws and regulations, anonymity can be a shield for those expressing dissent or conducting sensitive research.
Anonymity can also play a role in personal safety and security, protecting individuals from potential harassment or harm that could arise from their online activities. It allows people to explore and express aspects of their identity that they may feel uncomfortable or unsafe to share under their real name, especially in societies where certain identities or opinions are stigmatized.
However, anonymity online has its complexities and can lead to challenges. While it can enable important freedoms of expression and protect individuals from harm, it also creates an environment where people may feel emboldened to engage in negative or harmful behaviors, such as harassment or spreading misinformation, due to the perceived lack of accountability. This dual nature of online anonymity makes it a complex issue in the context of internet governance and digital communication ethics.
The debate around online anonymity is multifaceted, involving discussions about privacy, free speech, safety, and the impact of anonymity on online communities and interactions. As the digital world evolves, the conversation about how to balance the benefits and challenges of anonymous identities continues to be significant.