zkMe Docs
Ask or search…
Comment on page

MeID Introduction

Dcentralized identity and credential management solutions have gained popularity in recent years due to their potential to provide greater privacy, security, and control over personal data compared to traditional centralized systems. However, some issues with existing decentralized identity solutions remain unaddressed. Here are some of the key challenges:
One of these issues is identity cloning, where attackers can easily create fake identities that are identical to real ones, posing a serious security threat.
Another issue is the bundling problem, where multiple identities are linked together, making it difficult to manage them separately.
Scalability is another significant challenge for many decentralized identity solutions, requiring significant computational resources to operate.
Compatibility with legacy systems is also essential for decentralized identity solutions to be widely adopted. Achieving identity interoperability becomes crucial to ensure that identities can be seamlessly shared and used across different platforms.
Sybil attacks are a significant challenge for many decentralized identity solutions, allowing attackers to create multiple fake identities to carry out malicious activities.
Ensuring accountability is critical for decentralized identity solutions, allowing users to hold other parties accountable for their actions. However, many solutions lack the ability to enforce accountability.
There are several rules that must be followed when issuing and verifying credentials in a decentralized identity system to ensure that credentials issued and verified in a decentralized identity system are secure, trustworthy, and privacy-preserving:
Identity Verification: Before issuing a credential, the issuer must verify the identity of the individual to whom the credential will be issued. This can be done through a variety of methods, such as in-person verification, document verification, or digital identity verification.
• Credential Issuance: Once the issuer has verified the individual's identity, they can issue a verifiable credential that includes the necessary claims and metadata. The credential must conform to the Verifiable Credential Data Model standard and any custom extensions specified by the network.
• Cryptographic Proofs: The credential must include a cryptographic proof, such as a digital signature or zero-knowledge proof, that allows the recipient of the credential to verify its authenticity and integrity.
• Revocation: The issuer must have the ability to revoke a credential if it is no longer valid or if the individual to whom the credential was issued no longer has the right to use it. Revocation must be done in a way that does not compromise the privacy or security of the individual.
• Verification: When verifying a credential, the recipient must use the cryptographic proof included with the credential to ensure its authenticity and integrity. The recipient must also verify that the credential was issued by a trusted party and that it has not been revoked.
In conclusion, addressing the issues of identity cloning, bundling, scalability, interoperability, sybil-resistance, and accountability will be critical for the widespread adoption of decentralized identity and credential management solutions in the web3 ecosystem. The proposed solutions discussed in literature are steps towards addressing these issues and provide insights for future research in this field.