• TerdFerguson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Conceptually, I think this is a lot closer to where things need to be. I do understand that the application does fall short in some critical aspects of security though, and on that basis it would still need more work to be suitable.

    I understand and agree with the general sentiment of resisting the surveillance state that is dominating tech ever more in this space of ID verification, but this looks to me like it would be okay if the app was built with some very strict secure-by-design approach… which it does NOT seem to be.

    • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I do understand that the application does fall short in some critical aspects of security though

      Actually it doesn’t. I looked at the specs. Project seems to be open source, and uses solid cryptography to selectively reveal data you want to be revealed, and nothing more. This is absolute opposite to the UK garbage where you’re asked to send your pics to every fraudster around.

      • TerdFerguson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        No, the way some of the data is locally stored unprotected on the device itself is a pretty significant flaw.

        • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Depends what data. Zk-proofs can be produced outside of secure enclave. It’s private keys for regular cryptography that need special storage

          • TerdFerguson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            That’s not the only thing you need to protect, but I’m not going to go back and forth with you on this. You must know better than me.