Sovereignty, privacy, and ethics in blockchain-based identity management systems
- PDF / 656,588 Bytes
- 14 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 64 Downloads / 219 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Sovereignty, privacy, and ethics in blockchain‑based identity management systems Georgy Ishmaev1
© The Author(s) 2020
Abstract Self-sovereign identity (SSI) solutions implemented on the basis of blockchain technology are seen as alternatives to existing digital identification systems, or even as a foundation of standards for the new global infrastructures for identity management systems. It is argued that ‘self-sovereignty’ in this context can be understood as the concept of individual control over identity relevant private data, capacity to choose where such data is stored, and the ability to provide it to those who need to validate it. It is also argued that while it might be appealing to operationalise the concept of ‘self-sovereignty’ in a narrow technical sense, depreciation of moral semantics obscures key challenges and long-term repercussions. Closer attention to the normative substance of the ‘sovereignty’ concept helps to highlight a range of ethical issues pertaining to the changing nature of human identity in the context of ubiquitous private data collection. Keywords Identity management · SSI · Sovereignty · Privacy · Blockchain
Introduction Any technical solution dealing with the issues of human identity management and private data is intertwined with ethical challenges. This is especially so in the case of SelfSovereign Identity (SSI) solutions enabled by the developments in blockchain technologies. To an extent, these systems—like cryptocurrencies—are also influenced by the ambitions to push towards the decentralisation of trust in complex systems and reduce reliance on trusted third parties. Proponents of these solutions argue that SSI systems can bring enhanced privacy, data security and full controls over their digital identities to individuals (Tobin and Reed 2016; Allen 2017; Ma et al. 2018; Wagner et al. 2018). These claims are loaded with ethical assumptions seemingly targeting the very core set of concerns regarding privacy and identity in the emerging socio-technical structures of contemporary society. And as with many other similar claims, it is hard to disentangle actual technological implementations from promises, unsupported assumptions, and even
* Georgy Ishmaev [email protected]; [email protected] 1
Technical University of Delft, Van Mourik Broekmanweg, 2628 XE Delft, The Netherlands
misinterpretations, constituting the all too familiar retinue of blockchain technology applications. The task to qualify these claims becomes even more complicated once we consider that SSI systems, like many other blockchain implementations, are still in the experimental stages of development. However, what stands them apart is that these experiments seem to deal with hypersensitive issues of individual identity and identification. And as Sen (2007) vividly demonstrates on the historical lessons from the twentieth century, experiments on identity can have dramatic and undesirable consequences. It is also evident that a proper moral evaluation of any technical implementa
Data Loading...
