[Privsec] what shall we do in in Athens?

[Garth Graham]

Although Robin Gross said:

> THE PLENARY SESSIONS AND WORKSHOPS AT THE ATHENS MEETING WILL BE  
> BASED ON THE CONTENT OF THESE
> SUBMISSIONS. * ......   The deadline is 15 July 2006 for your  
> submission to influence how the event is programmed.

... I remain a little unclear as to the path from "contributions" to  
"program."    I kind of like the odds and scope of going for a  
"workshop."  I suspect that getting a slot in a main section would be  
VERY time limited, or that we might run the risk of being relegated  
to the 5 minute "Statements" video loop.  Can we assume that our  
"contribution" by July 15th is actually a proposal for a workshop  
that includes a substantive argument as to why the topic is relevant  
to a theme?


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Privsec] what shall we do in in Athens?
> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:59:42 +0200
> From: Ralf Bendrath <bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de>
>
> I just had an exchange with Garth Graham, who originally had the  
> idea of submitting the theme of "user-centric digital identity", on  
> which we based our submission on "Strengthening the Trust Framework  
> through People-Centred Digital Privacy and Identity". ....  I still  
> think it could provide a good inroad into the security session,  
> especially as we could get some of the industry people on board.

And I am comfortable with retaining that as a working title - because  
it brings that phrase "user-centric digital identity back on to the  
the table - whereas the IGF agenda makes no mention of it.


> Robin has added some more ideas for the security session:
> "- Civil liberties concerns from government surveillance programs
> - Privacy rights and consumer trust of Internet
> - Role of free and open source software in promoting information  
> security
> - Impact on freedom of expression from spam and content filtering
> - Publication of WHOIS database on Internet and privacy and  
> consumer trust"

... and Robin's list makes no mention of identity either.  I'd  
suggest revising "Privacy rights and consumer trust of Internet" to  
read:

"Identity, privacy rights and user trust of the Internet." (keeping  
in mind there's more to daily life online than commerce).

Here's a couple of stray thoughts toward the "content" of that  
contribution.....

Doc Searls <http://www.searls.com/doc/os2/docchapter.html> recently  
said something about the interactive nature of authority which  
applies to the case for user-centric digital identity that we must make:
> Information ... is derived from the verb inform, which is related  
> to the verb form. To inform is not to "deliver information", but  
> rather to form the other party. If you tell me something I didn't  
> know before, I am changed by that. If I believe you, and value what  
> you say, I have granted you authority. Meaning, I have given you  
> the right to author what I know. Therefore, we are all authors of  
> each other. This is a profoundly human condition in any case, but  
> it is an especially important aspect of the open source value  
> system. By forming each other, as we also form useful software, we  
> are making the world. Not merely changing it.
When we use the word "identity," we mean more than "identification."   
We mean the self-determined public presentation of the self. Thus  
identity, autonomy and trust are linked.

I hypothesize that the Internet is an outgrowth of our awareness  
that, over the long run, reciprocity is a better social survival  
strategy than competition.  The Internet is inherently interactive.   
It's networked relationships depend on the assumption that  
reciprocity and collaboration will result from interaction.  If I  
know that I own the public presentation of my "self," that I am the  
autonomous teller of my story, then I am more likely to trust that my  
interaction with you will be reciprocated.  If I am confident I own  
the digital expression of my self then my sense of the risk that I  
take in interacting with your will be less.   Therefore, in thinking  
about the next steps in the design of the Internet's basic functions,  
it as important that the concept of user-centric digital identity get  
firmly embedded in the code.

... and, since ultimately we are talking about writing code, I agree  
with the need expressed by Ralf and Karen Banks to get industry  
people on board.  Here are two who can effectively communicate the  
nature of the "problem" and possible solutions at the level of code,  
and in the way that we mean it:

Dick Hardt, Sxip Identity,
Identity 2.0.   <http://www.identity20.com/media/OSCON2005/>
ETech 2006 -- Who Is the Dick on My Site?  <http://identity20.com/ 
media/ETECH_2006/>

Kim Cameron.  The Laws of Identity
http://www.identityblog.com/?page_id=354

GG