• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    So like, when do we get a government-run service to issue zero-knowledge proofs about us so companies have no reason to store stuff like this in the first place?

    • Godric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh aye, I am the #1 government truster, they should “not record” where I visit and should be trusted to ignore my internet history

      • kibiz0r@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        They wouldn’t see what sites you give the tokens to — unless those sites choose to phone home, for some reason.

        • You log in to the government site
        • You ask for a token to prove your age/gender/whatever
        • You copy the token
        • You go to the age/gender-restricted site
        • You provide the token
        • The restricted site asks the government site how to verify any arbitrary token (but doesn’t mention your specific token)
        • The restricted site verifies the token
      • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        2 days ago

        If I had to choose between a government and a private entity to store my personal governmental records (e.g. age and name), I’d 100% choose the government first.

        • Omega@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          In turkey, the government stores data words than the company. I can be doxxed just by giving you hints of which city I live in. It’s bad

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

          easy to say, but that depends entirely on the government and company doesn’t it?

          • Mistic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Any government already has all of that information, so, no.

            By giving it to a company, you just increase the risks of info leakage.

            • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              I assume OP actually meant the additional info the government can get from where I authenticate with my goverment ID to a company.

              Hypothecial situation: You wanna buy a sex toy.
              If the goverment does store where and what you buy, they could punish you by withholding services.
              And they might not say why and give a bs excuse or send you on a goose hunt to do more paperwork.
              You can suspect that but probably never proof that it was the case.

          • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            As always life is complicated.
            I am talking about my personal situation.

            ^(Do I really need to put a disclaimer to all posts, that mentions all comments are from my own view and might no apply to every situation in every country?)

      • offspec@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        ??? This is just textbook sso/openid but backed by the government. There’s nothing intrinsically insecure about having third parties send you directly to a trusted government site for authorization.

          • offspec@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            What connection do you think a third party is saving when using openid? Generally speaking the only thing the third party needs is your identifier which in most cases is just an email. It’s no more devastating for the user base for that information to be leaked than it is when they’re handling authorization themselves. I personally think using a government backed authorization platform is a terrible idea and something completely liable to be abused by those in power, but it would objectively be better than trying to have every single service store your personally identifiable information themselves.

      • iglou@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The only entity able to connect you in this case is the identity verification third party. The premise is that a government-backed identification system is more secure than a rando private company.

        Private company asks government “hey is this user real and unique”, government replies “yes”. Private webiste does not need to know your ID. No identifying element needs to be transmitted by the government.

        Of course some private companies will need more, and in that case the user, you, can grant them access to data, much like the current authentication systems using Google accounts & co.

        In which case the flow would be:

        • Rando insecure company asks government “is this user real and unique? I need their name”
        • Government website asks you “this rando company wants to know your name”
        • You accept
        • Goverbment replies to rando insecure conpany “yes, user real, name is X”

        That’s how it should be.