论文标题
一个多个分散的身份前沿:抽象诉Web3中的合成性权衡
A Plural Decentralized Identity Frontier: Abstraction v. Composability Tradeoffs in Web3
论文作者
论文摘要
在本文中,我们探讨了当今Web3中的抽象和合成性之间的张力,特别是在身份解决方案中,并认为当前的标准DID DID v1.0已足够规定,允许许多方法和实例化,包括基于区块链的证书。我们今天将Web3身份中的实验视为添加剂和互补性,并认为通常引用的差异是程度,更含义的,更少的物质。通过插图,我们将分散的命名服务和基于区块链的身份证书(例如Soulbound令牌(SBT))与分散的标识符(DIDS)和可验证的凭据(VCS)进行了比较。这两个范式在有意义地区分的范围内都具有相似的潜力和挑战。具体来说,我们指的是对非共识验证(Scarlet Letters)的恐惧,并通过向DIDS与DIDS相关的公共地址发出无害的公共猩红色信件,以供任何人供任何人看到。此外,我们认为,由于未指定SBT,因此可以将SBTs表征为VC的迭代或扩展,这些VCS还渴望与Web3智能合约实现合成性,以正确执行代码,隐私,胁迫抵抗力和审查性抵抗力。我们为风投如何实现这些特性提供了研究路径。我们没有对以前审查过的成本,可伸缩性,可转让性或常识来发表评论。
In this article, we explore the tension between abstraction and composability in web3 today, specifically within identity solutions, and argue that the current standard DID v1.0 is sufficiently under specified, allowing for many methods and instantiations, including blockchain based certificates. We view experiments today in web3 identity as additive and complementary, and argue that often cited differences are of degree and more in form, less in substance. By way of illustration, we compare decentralized naming services and blockchain based identity certificates such as soulbound tokens (SBTs) to decentralized identifiers (DIDs) and verifiable credentials (VCs). Both paradigms, to the extent they can be meaningfully differentiated, share similar potential as well as challenges. Specifically, we refer to fears about non consensual verification (scarlet letters) and show DID method iterations are not immune by issuing an innocuous public scarlet letter to a DIDs associated public address for anyone to see. Moreover, we argue that because SBTs are unspecified, one could characterize SBTs as an iteration, or extension, of VCs that additionally aspire to achieve composability with web3 smart contracts for correct execution of code, privacy, coercion resistance, and censorship resistance. We offer research paths for how VCs can also achieve these properties. We do not comment on cost, scalability, transferability, or common knowledge as they have been previously reviewed.