5 ms·

Doesn't Worldcoin produce Zero Knowledge Proofs of biometric data? If yes i do not see what kind of personal data the ledger may hold. It holds the proof of the

Doesn't Worldcoin produce Zero Knowledge Proofs of biometric data? If yes i do not see what kind of personal data the ledger may hold. It holds the proof of their data, not their data. If some people are not aware of ZKP here is a short really like [1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/c6gpq9nKogo https://www.youtube.com/shorts/c6gpq9nKogo

coppsilgold 2y ago
If they use ZKP's correctly then what you are proving is membership in a set. However, they are collecting iris scans which means they are the ones building the set and therefore own all the data about all the members of that set. To do it properly the government should be the ones who build the set. There are also problems with respect to stolen identities. If addressed, it's not fully private - you are given a token which you must reuse, making you pseudonymous. Or else a single stolen identity may be used infinitely without anyone realizing it.
- emporas 2y ago
  >If they use ZKP's correctly then what you are proving is membership in a set. >However, they are collecting iris scans which means they are the ones building the set and therefore own all the data about all the members of that set. Totally agree, but any other official of any kind can do the same and create their own membership set. A mayor of a town can create a similar set of citizens. A football's team coach can create their own membership set, of players and fans. I don't see why that particular membership set is more special than any other. > To do it properly the government should be the ones who build the set. To do it properly governments around the world should agree on a standard or two, and use that standard worldwide for the next 50 to 100 years. See for example screws and screwdrivers [1] which are effectively identical for so many years. When a standard is established for identity, for ownership, for ownership transactions, for signatures, for contracts, for passports and many other things then it is government's job to keep the data safe and private, we agree on that. As soon as identities for example are a technological screw, then we don't want incompatibilities between governments. > There are also problems with respect to stolen identities. The ZKP does not need to be the identity by itself. Another identity can be tied to the ZKP proof, and use it's children identities for everyday use. They implemented something like that for Python to avoid supply chain attacks [2]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXWSn8rMeEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXWSn8rMeEo [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42136375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42136375
  - coppsilgold 2y ago
    > The ZKP does not need to be the identity by itself. Another identity can be tied to the ZKP proof Which is exactly what I said: > you are given a token which you must reuse, making you pseudonymous The way it's usually done with ZKP's is through the use of a nullifier, a cryptographic product of hidden information which will always be static. In this case the nullifier may be a public key.
tim333 2y ago
It's all a bit confusing, but I think there are two separate parts to the process of joining and using Worldcoin. To join up they scan your iris and keep a record of the iris scans to stop you applying for multiple accounts. It's anonymous apart from the iris scan - they don't need your name or dob or anything like that. The second part is once you have an account you can use it to prove you are the person with that account, and this is probably where the zero knowledge proofs come in. In this second stage your irises are irrelevant, they only come up when first applying. The accounts are very much like crypto wallet public/private key accounts I think although they try to hide the details from you a bit in the app.
- emporas 2y ago
  Thanks for the info. That's what i thought the process would be. Although i do consider worldcoin to be irrelevant, and eventually to fail at some point in the future.
  - tim333 2y ago
    It's been quite fun from the free shitcoin handout point of view but hasn't had enough uptake to be practical as a form of id.

coppsilgold 2y ago

If they use ZKP's correctly then what you are proving is membership in a set. However, they are collecting iris scans which means they are the ones building the set and therefore own all the data about all the members of that set. To do it properly the government should be the ones who build the set. There are also problems with respect to stolen identities. If addressed, it's not fully private - you are given a token which you must reuse, making you pseudonymous. Or else a single stolen identity may be used infinitely without anyone realizing it.

emporas 2y ago
>If they use ZKP's correctly then what you are proving is membership in a set. >However, they are collecting iris scans which means they are the ones building the set and therefore own all the data about all the members of that set. Totally agree, but any other official of any kind can do the same and create their own membership set. A mayor of a town can create a similar set of citizens. A football's team coach can create their own membership set, of players and fans. I don't see why that particular membership set is more special than any other. > To do it properly the government should be the ones who build the set. To do it properly governments around the world should agree on a standard or two, and use that standard worldwide for the next 50 to 100 years. See for example screws and screwdrivers [1] which are effectively identical for so many years. When a standard is established for identity, for ownership, for ownership transactions, for signatures, for contracts, for passports and many other things then it is government's job to keep the data safe and private, we agree on that. As soon as identities for example are a technological screw, then we don't want incompatibilities between governments. > There are also problems with respect to stolen identities. The ZKP does not need to be the identity by itself. Another identity can be tied to the ZKP proof, and use it's children identities for everyday use. They implemented something like that for Python to avoid supply chain attacks [2]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXWSn8rMeEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXWSn8rMeEo [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42136375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42136375
- coppsilgold 2y ago
  > The ZKP does not need to be the identity by itself. Another identity can be tied to the ZKP proof Which is exactly what I said: > you are given a token which you must reuse, making you pseudonymous The way it's usually done with ZKP's is through the use of a nullifier, a cryptographic product of hidden information which will always be static. In this case the nullifier may be a public key.

tim333 2y ago

It's all a bit confusing, but I think there are two separate parts to the process of joining and using Worldcoin. To join up they scan your iris and keep a record of the iris scans to stop you applying for multiple accounts. It's anonymous apart from the iris scan - they don't need your name or dob or anything like that. The second part is once you have an account you can use it to prove you are the person with that account, and this is probably where the zero knowledge proofs come in. In this second stage your irises are irrelevant, they only come up when first applying. The accounts are very much like crypto wallet public/private key accounts I think although they try to hide the details from you a bit in the app.

emporas 2y ago
Thanks for the info. That's what i thought the process would be. Although i do consider worldcoin to be irrelevant, and eventually to fail at some point in the future.
- tim333 2y ago
  It's been quite fun from the free shitcoin handout point of view but hasn't had enough uptake to be practical as a form of id.